Technology: Striking Balance
Whilst some of the examples in this week’s podcast are quite dated, many of the messages have not changed.
What echoed with me most from Engell and O’Donnell’s (1999) podcast, was O’Donnell’s notions of the cost-benefit tradeoffs when it comes to new technology. His example was that of the car; we can accept by using this medium of transport, to drive at a certain speed to get us from A to B, that it comes with a ‘death toll’ package every time we increase the speed limit – or use one for that matter.
O’Donnell also mentioned that as time goes on, technology tends to evolve in that it gets safer. This is true with the automobile, microwaves and even mobile phones. However, does the way we use the technology get safer in time? One could argue here that with more efficiencies and features, we become more deficient in others. Again, another cost-benefit analysis that needs to be considered. Look at how phones have shifted us into drone like behaviour in the way we communicate. Sure, it is nice to be globally connected through this technology, but one only needs to look around at a restaurant or any social atmosphere to find at least a few, if not all in the party disengaged with the actual ‘real life’ social connectedness and more engaged in their online persona. Quite sad, really. Gary Turk’s (2014) viral YouTube click, “Look Up”, illuminated these very same points. Furthermore, I found these, Pink Floyd: The Wall-esque, illustrations by Steve Cutts (http://www.stevecutts.com/illustration.html) to (harshly) speak out to the road we are traveling on in relation to the negative effects of our advancements in technology.
Conversely, I often wonder that if an international survey were to be undertaken on crime rates and whether they have gone down or not in relation to the rise of the popularity of ownership of smart phones? Do cities with high smart phone per capita ownership see less crime than in their previous era without one? People have high quality video capturing devices within reach at almost any given time. We see the videos of how thieves are captured these days by civilian captured footage keeping us more informed, but has it attributed to lower crime over all or are people less aware now, more than ever, of their surroundings? Perhaps any decreases in crime have been counter-balanced with higher accident rates with people using technology whilst walking as a pedestrian, or even worse, whilst operating a motor vehicle.
This podcast was quite a topical notion (or vice-versa) to Coughlan’s (2015) recent BBC article that I had read recently. In sum, the recent results from an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report found that investing heavily in computers and other classroom technology does not improve pupils’ performance. After looking at international standardized testing results in over 70 countries, it found that schools with fewer access or resources, like those in East Asia, had outperformed countries that had much higher access to technology and Internet. On a more positive note, and one that I can align with, the report did find that students who used computers in moderation did have somewhat better outcomes than those who did use computers rarely.
The BBC article is some interesting food for thought in the cost-benefit analysis pudding from the lens of an educator. So maybe the argument for blended learning isn’t a strong one after reading this article, yet two messages are clear to me from this and the podcast: (1) Balance, and (2) Motivation. First, I believe that it is important to strike balance in all that we do. It’s important doctrine in the IB Curriculum in which I teach and in my moral compass in life. I often tell my children that for every hour that is spent in front of an electronic device, it should be balanced with either real social interactions, or even better, interacting socially through play or sport. Secondly, while the article does make an interesting point that computer or other modern classroom technology may not be making pupils’ smarter, I would need see much further studies on that of motivation and engagement before I conclude on my own verdict. I know that this type of technology fuels passion for some children, gives them more variety in choice in regards to how to show what they know, and more importantly, it’s an amazing tool for harnessing yet another realm of creative expression. For me, these tools are for creating and not consumption. We, as educators, would be doing children a very large disservice if we chose to neglect these technologies to further advance the pedagogical view of ‘teaching to the (standardized) test’. Throwing them out to a digitally literate word, illiterate, does not sit well with me.
References
Coughlan, S. (2015, September 15). Computers ‘do not improve’ pupil results, says OECD. BBC. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34174796
Engell, J. & O’Donnell, J. (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace [Audio file]. Cambridge Forums.
Turk, G. [Gary Turk]. (2014, April 25). Look Up [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/Z7dLU6fk9QY
Thank you for your post Justin. There is so much in it that I relate to as a father and educator! But I will only address the issue of motivation. I recently found an article that comments on the role of video games particularly in children learning English as a second language. I am not a big fan of video games, neither my kids, and I tell them all the time that the most important set of skills —at least, for me— are the social. But I cannot deny the role that technology have played in scaffolding their social capital. Let me know what do you think!
Hi Ernesto,
Thanks for the link. However, it is a link to a pay for the article. Do you have an open link where a student of this course could access this article?
Balance and moderation is such an important aspect of any practice in life. There is no doubt in my mind that many people do not exercise this balance in terms of mobile device use. However, it also feels like the drawbacks of new technologies are magnified far more in the media than the benefits. Obviously, we all experience particular benefits everyday: ease of communication with friends and colleagues, faster dissemination of news and current events, and the ability to instantaneously share anything we’d like. But still, the social emphasis on mobile devices seems to be largely negative. Consider this older image, where people are “looking down”, not socializing, nor being present in the moment.
For many, this image would probably be seen as completely acceptable in the eyes of the general public, even though it is really not that much different than this one, that would be perceived as negative:
I say this in part to be glib, but also to emphasize a point that there are certain times and places where both technology isolation and technology abstinence are both okay. Additionally, as much as we’d like to assume that people are simply scrolling through Facebook or Instagram on their phones, being completely rude in social contexts, I know that many use their phone as a personal manager: to book appointments and manage a calendar, create to-do lists, take notes, and more.
But how do we get students to reflect on their device use as they grow up in a world rampant with digital technologies and texts? In ETEC 511, I worked with a group to create this project: http://digitallydependent.weebly.com/. This case study project was designed to be utilized within a middle school context and have students analyze their own device use through exploring a series of media links, articles, and posts that discuss the benefits and drawbacks of each side. The hope is that students can reach an understanding of moderate and balanced device use, and eventually, apply that in their own lives. A big part of being digitally literate is being socially appropriate with use, too.
Images:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4027/4638656232_14430c0f4c.jpg
https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1329/5166351572_28956d3f1e_b.jpg
Hi Victoria,
I agree that media tends to jump on anything that is ‘good press’. I’m very skeptical of the article and continue promoting the message of balance.
Thanks for the contrasting links as to perception. I completely could resonate with the Seoul Metro photo as I was one of those people myself. However, one could argue that they are being culturally sensitive as it is considered rude to be a loud talker on the subway there (I have a Korean wife and lived in Seoul for about 8 years). Not to mention the lightning fast and free internet available on the metro! I used to be able to do some of my MET work whilst commuting around the city.
I tried to use the embed code to demo the images, but they didn’t embed. 🙁 You can click the links at the bottom of the comment for each respective image.
Justin,
First of all I would like to thank you for a very intriguing posting. I especially appreciated the article from the BBC outlining the lack of results in schools that pushed for a strong integration of technology. I too work in an IB school and have seen a much slower integration of technology coming into our classrooms. Being a ‘technology junkie’ myself I have welcomed the integration of technology and, at times, become frustrated with its lack of progress. That being said when I have observed other teachers use technology in their classrooms in many cases it seems to be used on the ‘substitution level.’ That is to say teachers will simply use computers to allow students to read e-books instead of traditional books or have them write text on ‘Word’ instead of paper. While I do not think there is anything wrong with this, using technology as simply a substitution does not allow it to be used to its full potential. I am going to make reference to the SAMR model and provide a link below. This model explains how technology can be used in the classroom. The bottom two levels ‘substitution’ and ‘augmentation’ simply uses technology as a replacement of older methods. The top two levels, ‘modification’ and ‘redefinition’ focus on using technology to enrich teaching in new ways. In order to avoid such results as the study showed on the BBC teachers are going to have to focus on these top two levels. For many this would mean being open-minded to new ideas and being a risk-taker while looking at the possibility of a failure of a lesson.
http://www.schrockguide.net/samr.html
Hi Adam,
Love that SAMR model. The ‘M’ and the ‘R’ is always in the backdrop of any blended learning activity in my classroom. If the former two of the acronym are at play, I better have a darn good excuse!
You know you’re an IB educator when you’re using the profiles in your vernacular far beyond the reaches of your classroom. Love how you worked in three of them in your response ;).