When watching these video cases, I was struck by how many of the arguments and concerns raised then are the same today. On the FOR side, tech is seen to give consistent, dependable results, and instant feedback, allowing opportunity for corrections (Teacher B); tech saves time from tedious data analysis and plotting to increase deeper learning (Teacher A) and gives the opportunity to engage students while developing motivation and transferable skills (Teacher F). Teacher E talked about the opportunity for collaboration and the feeling of ownership. On the AGAINST, issues that were raised were a loss or reduction of hands-on lab skills (Teacher B), tech as a barrier: needing to learn tech as opposed to learning the content (Teacher B, students 9, 11, 15), financial costs and support (Teachers F, D & A), and the greater time demands (cases 5&8).
For the most part, it seemed that the barriers were on the side of the teachers (uncomfortable with tech, no support, finances, limited time) while the benefits are mainly student oriented (engagement, higher order problems, deeper learning, collaboration, transferable skills), which leads me to wonder how could we not use at least some tech? If we don’t, are we becoming barriers to the students education and engagement?
On the other hand, I see some practical questions that should be addressed:
- Using extensive tech requires students to learn many tech skills and programs. How do we maintain a balance between learning the tech without limiting the content?
- How can we engage all students with effectively with limited resources? Is there an ideal ratio between # of students and # of devices/tech?
- For level 3 classrooms, where students are self-directed, the common understanding is that students are suddenly motivated and engaged, because those are the ones who are interviewed. In my experience, there are always some students (usually teenage boys) who are not engaged, interested, or motivated about ANYTHING in school, regardless of subject, content, or teaching method. Are they at greater risk or falling through the cracks, creating distractions, or needing management in this type of setting? Some students do better in a structured setting… and for some the teachers want it! Thoughts?
This year I have 8 laptops in my class, which I use a lot for collaborative work and digital reflections/discussions, etc. I have found that it takes a LOT more classroom management to control the off-task behaviour of a few of my students, to the point where it almost ruins it for the rest. Having teacher-centered gives that element of control needed for those individuals. Halfway through the semester I gave a survey to my grade 12’s and they indicated that the best ratio is 2:1. This allows for some collaboration, while not having any “fringe” people feeling left out or uninvolved. As for motivation and engagement, I have found that the greater diversity of learning strategies, the better, but the amount of new tech/software should be limited, rather for the most part, existing tech skills should be built on and used in new and creative ways.
David,
Great questions!
1. Learning v. Learning Tech – Teacher F had some good insight about how to maintain this balance. I don’t have his exact words written down, but he talked about rewriting questions to make sure that they are focused on math, not calculators. When keeping this as the focus, hopefully the tools are easily learned and the rest can be made up with teacher direction and assistance. There are very few skills that are vital enough that extensive amounts of time should be focused on using the hardware, but a multitude of skills that are transferable and applicable to multiple situations, leading to sustainable education and growth.
2. Andersson et. al (2016) have done a study that looked at collaborative work and device ratios. To summarize some of their findings, they found
1:1 lead to increased independent work
1:2 was best for collaboration
1:3 caused one student to disengage
2:4 quickly turned into 1:2 with all students engaged
In general, even numbered ratios engaged more students while odd numbered
ratios allowed for some students to check out.
Laptops encouraged cooperative work while tablets encouraged more collaboration.
I read this study about a year ago and have been experimenting in my own classroom, keeping an informal log of students disengaging and the technology ratios that were being used. I have found this to be overwhelmingly true. However, if the third person in a 1:3 ratio is given a processing heavy task (such as a hands-on activity) it seems to mitigate some of the problems and keep them involved in the group. Also, after teaching in a classroom with iPads and then switching to a classroom that has Chromebooks, I have noticed that it was easier for groups to collaborate on iPads, as the device lays flat on the desk and is easily visible. Also, every student can engage with the device, no matter where they are sitting by means of the touchscreen. Chromebooks tend to have a slightly more isolating effect, in my opinion and observations.
-Jonathan-
References
Andersson, A., Wiklund, M., & Hatakka, M. (2016). Emerging collaborative and cooperative practices in 1: 1 schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(4), 413-430.
Thanks for a thorough response, Jonathan. I think your point about tablets vs. chromebooks is a telling one as far as interactivity goes. We opted for laptops, though. They are more practical for common tasks like typing documents and reports, producing slide shows, and using common familiar software. Also I think they are more robust. Have you found you were able to accomplish all your needs with the ipads, or do you switch devices depending on the activity?
I appreciate your point about focussing on the topic rather than the technology, but I have found that for students to be involved in really immersive activities such as RAFTS, wikis, simulations or creating digital artifacts, there is a pretty big learning curve regardless of the technology, so that for every one of these, extra time is needed to learn the tech even if it a “simple” one… all this time adds up, so choices are forced on us regardless.