My definition of technology is similar to David Jonassen (2000) because I believe that students learn from thinking in meaningful ways. Thinking is engaged by activities and hands-on learning, which can be fostered through technology. “Nothing can be taught unless it has the potential of making sense to the learner, and learning itself is nothing but the endeavor to make sense” (Frank Smith, 1978). Technology can take the form of anything that enhances student learning, provides students the opportunity to develop skills that will empower them, or allows students to share evidence of their learning.

My ideal pedagogical design of an elementary TELE centres around meeting learners needs to support differentiation, enrich learning intentions, and to transform teaching and learning. Technology needs to be viewed as a tool that provides deeper context, creative outlets, and opportunities where students take ownership over their learning. For a science curriculum, the TELE could provide virtual field trips, 3D exploration, and ePortfolio’s to post and reflect on their learning journey. Technology should provide a learning environment that supports inquiry, problem-solving, and thinking in meaningful ways, that a standard classroom could not fulfil.

References:

Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools, 2nd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/ Prentice Hall. Retrieved from Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jonassen+mindtools&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Search

Smith, Frank. 1978. Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.