Technology Integration Critique

Dreamweaver Project

Angelia Greiner

September 18, 2005

Somewhere between the “high five” for having accomplished what we thought was impossible and the deep exhalation of breath that inevitably follows after completing a challenging task, we begin to realize that working with computers, and more importantly, getting our students to work using computers, is a worthwhile endeavor. Many teachers feel as if implementing technology in the classroom is just one more “hoop” they must jump through to show they are indeed worthy educators. Others take on the challenge of computers with superhuman zeal. Other educators, myself included, find the integration of technology to be both rewarding and at other times extremely frustrating. Somewhere in all the computer jargon and the multiple ways of implementing the myriad of educational philosophies that exist, teachers sometimes lose their sense of perspective. The goal is always to best serve the educational needs of our students. How we go about reaching that goal for each of the students in our classrooms is the challenge..

What is the goal of education in our public schools? What is our task as educators? A public education should provide the knowledge and skills necessary to be productive participatory citizens in today’s global society. Teachers need to use a variety of tools from pen and paper to computer technology in order to reach those goals with each of their students. According to the U.S. Department of Education’s National Education Technology Plan 2004, we, as a nation, are moving toward a “Golden Age in American Education” that Secretary of Education Rod Paige believes “bodes well for the for the future of our country” (DOE, p.5). Such words of inspiration are hard to ignore. Take a moment to reflect on the students you teach today. Certainly most are much more adept with the computer than I was only a year ago. Others seem to struggle to locate information and navigate through basic word processing software. Those that have ready access to information, how to locate it and how to integrate that knowledge in a meaningful and productive way do better in school and work. As teachers we have to weigh the importance of making sure all our students have equitable access to information versus our desire to flee from technology and buy more pencils and paper.

Those educators who have mastered the basics of word processing and Internet navigation tend to forget that there are students in their classes in which the computer screen and a key board are frustrating pieces of equipment. I know because I was one of them. I also understand the pull to leave technology behind and use the dependable pen and paper technique. One of the crucial keys to a successful integration of technology is the teacher’s level of expertise and overall attitude toward technology. It takes time to create Power Point games, web quests, and correct mistakes made by students in word processing programs. However, teachers are resilient and flexible. In 1983 A Nation at Risk served as a wake up call to America’s educators that our children were not performing as well as students in the past on standardized tests. ( Paige, p.9). States across the nation began creating and implementing ways to measure student achievement and assess teacher performance. The use of technology is a major componant on teacher evaluation forms. Some states have even tied the use of technology in the classroom to additional stipends and promotions. Now President Bush sends a wake up call to America’s educators with the legislation known as No Child Left Behind. In No Child Left Behind: Expanding the Promise, the federal government focuses on the need to close the achievement gap for minority students as well as making sure all public schools have access to technology including the Internet (Spelling, p. 2).

How do we address the needs of students who are falling behind? In 1983 lawmakers focused on teachers and whether or not they were being adequately trained to be effective in the classroom. Today’s beginning teachers are much more skilled in using the computer and integrating technology into their lessons which can be somewhat disconcerting for veteran teachers with more that ten years experience. Computers and computer technology has exploded in the field of education in just the past few years. Tom Snyder Productions is a familiar company that has been around for awhile. I can remember when they gave workshops for a nominal fee just to get teachers to look at their programs! With No Child Left Behind the focus is now on the student not the teacher. Instructional design seems to be shifting in this direction as well. Why the shift? Various forms of assessment across the nation illustrates that the gap is widening between those who are successful in school and those who are not. The question is not whether or not the teacher understands the content they teach but how the content is delivered in order to meet the needs of low achieving students. Learning to integrate various forms of technology in lessons allows for more flexibility and diversity in the delivery of content. In Learning to Read in the Computer Age, there is no question as to the need for the integration of technology into such fundamental tasks as learning to read. Computers allow teachers to build flexible universal designs, customize instruction to meet individual student learning styles, and create versatility in the process of instruction and in various forms of assessment (Meyer &Rose, p.8-10). No other technology to date has the capability of addressing the various needs of students like computer technology.

With all the possibilities open to educators in the use of computer technology, the actual implementation of technology into a lesson can be on the surface exciting but in creative reality daunting, leading many teachers to tread in unknown waters or not wade in at all. Robert Taylor in his article “The Computer in School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee” acknowledges the complexity in applying computer technology to the field of education. In attempting to assist the novice in implementing computer technology in the classroom, Taylor describes three modes of computer use: tutor, tool and tutee. These are familiar roles of the computer in terms of software games that provide and repetition and recall. However, Taylor’s suggestions for educators is to make full use of the computer’s functions in helping to problem solve, self-pace instruction, and generate microworlds (Taylor, 2005).

Seymour Papert and Idit Harel’s article on “Situating Constructionism” (1991) seems to embrace learner differences with gusto and suggests that the computer can serve as a powerful motivator and enabler of higher order thinking. The article brings up a very interesting argument in the use of computers to teach what is referred to as constructionism v. instructionism. Paper and Harel point out the pitfalls of embracing technology simply for technology’s sake. One has to evaluate the effectiveness of a construction for the ability to instruct and not just entertain. Moreover the assertion is made that, in the case of math at least, “instruction in mathematics is on the average very poor. But it does not follow that the route to better performance is necessarily the invention by researchers of more powerful and effective means of instruction (with or without computers)”.

One of the questions in “Teaching with Technology” is how teachers can illicit more meaningful, higher order thinking using computer technology. Computer technology can only be utilized effectively when sound educational pedagogy is applied to the process of lesson integration (Hooper & Rieber, 1995). This is good news for the veteran teacher whose experience lies in instruction and not in technology. Understanding that learning is an active process, collaboration can lead to reflection, and relevant learning environments engage learners, even reluctant, low achieving ones, underscores all technology integration in the classroom whether a computer is the source of technology or not.

One such integration of educational theory and technology is the creation of a web quest. In “Getting a Grip On Project-Based Learning: Theory, Cases And Recommendations” the importance of feedback, constructivism and collaboration are fused with the research technology of the Internet to produce a project-based web quest that meets various sound objectives for student learning( Grant, 2002). Project-based learning using web quest designs is just one way in which educational theory can be integrated in lesson design to meet the needs of diverse learners. Remember the goal is to best meet the educational needs of our students. Designing the lesson is still the teacher’s domain. Technology integration simply gives the classroom teacher more flexibility in the implementation of the lesson and more flexibility in meeting the diverse needs of students.

I have always believed that “attitude is everything” and this certainly applies in the task of keeping up with the Millenial generation. Like the Secretary of Education, I too believe we are entering an unprecedented time of accelerated growth both in technology and in education. Teachers must take it upon themselves to become more knowledgeable in how to address the needs of diverse learners and be able to tap into the possibilities associated with the Internet and other forms of technology. Teachers are known for their ability to adapt and show flexibility. Learning new ways to meet the needs of our students is a challenge that I know we will achieve as long as we continue to show flexibility and a caring attitude. As we struggle to implement new ways of meeting the challenges of the classroom, we are showing our students that perseverance, flexibility, and a positive attitude are a part of life and essential for success.

References

Grant, Michael M. (2002). Meridian Journal (Online Edition). GettingA Grip On Project –Based Learning: Theory, Cases and Recommendations. Retrieved August 30, 2005 from: www.ncsu.edu/meridian/win2002/514/index.html

Hooper,S..& Rieber, L.P. (1995). Teaching with Technology. In A.C. Ornstein( Ed.), Teaching: Theory into practice, (pp.154-170). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Retrieved August 29, 2005 from: www.nowhereroad.com/twt/index.html

Meyer, Anne, ED.D. & Rose, David H..ED.D. (1998). Learning To Read In The Computer Age (Vol. 3). Cambridge: Brookline Books

Papert, Seymour & Harel, Idit. (1991). Situating Constructionism. In Constructivism. Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1991. Retrieved August 30, 2005 from: www.papert.org/articles/SituatingConstructionism.html

Rose, David H. & Meyer, Anne. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Taylor, Robert P. (2005). The Computer in School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee. Retrieved August 30, 2005 from: www.citejournal.org/vol3/iss2/seminal/article1.cfm

U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Toward A New Golden Age In American Education: How the Internet, The Law and Today’s Students Are Revolutionizing Expectations. Jessup, MD. Rod Paige.

U.S. Department of Education. (March 2005). No Child Left Behind: Expanding the Promise – Guide to President Bush’s FY 2006 Education Agenda. Jessup, MD. Margaret Spellings.