Hey everyone! Sorry this is a little late; I pinched a nerve in my neck that has made school/laptop work a little difficult. I have enjoyed reading your posts and your questions for the interviews. It will be great to read the abstracts next week. The common threads I am finding amongst our challenges and successes are reassuring.
In many ways, I saw myself and my colleagues in these videos. Like the teacher in the video, I am a coach who works closely classroom teachers and their students. In these cases, I noted a few key values that my colleagues and I share:
- Collaboration – the importance of working as a team.
- Risk Taking – in the safety of the classroom
- Adaptability – on the part of teachers and students
- Challenging Ways of Thinking & Being Open Minded
I also heard common frustrations regarding time, teachers’ skill set, and an overall lack of knowledge. What I didn’t hear was a lack of access to technology, as that is a widespread issue and source of contention for our context. I am curious, how do these schools manage the technology so that each classroom and child gets what they need? How much control do they have over the technology budget and what devices are purchased for them to use?
The characteristics I observed and noted about student learning was overwhelmingly positive and reflective of the skills and values we want students to develop. I recognized many of the criteria we highlighted in our “Unpacking Assumptions” posts. These include:
- Students using background knowledge and applying the knowledge they acquire.
- Technology facilitates deeper, more authentic engagement.
- Activities and lessons are more hands on.
- Students have more control over and ownership in their learning.
In Case 6, one student commented that he maybe didn’t understand the content until he applied it using technology. It led me to wonder, how often does this happen? How often are students not given the opportunity to timely apply what they have learned and it negatively impacts their understanding? How many times do we as educators and a system assess surface level understanding, in many cases without even knowing we’re doing it?
I also wondered what kind of questions are being asked? Who is asking the questions? How are they arriving at these key, essential questions that are required to facilitate these learning experiences?
Your questions about how technology budgets are controlled or managed are well taken. I know that my school has slowly gone through a number of stages as described by Bereiter & Scardamalia (2006) in their short education letter. It speaks to education organizations starting out by seeing technology as an imperative, that schools must invest large sums of money into technology and training without any real thought on how it is beneficial to teaching and learning. Budgets are wasted on sophisticated and expensive technology and teachers/students on the ground get left in the dust. Schools that break out of that stage may end up in the second stage where technology is primarily used in ways that enhance learning. This sounds ideal but it may not be the best model to follow as it can become very fragmented. The third stage is when schools look beyond individual instances of enhancement and consider the overall learning goals and cognitive/social development in students. This is the stage that my school is moving towards but it is certainly easier said than done.
If there was a lack of access to technology in my context, I would start asking tough questions to those above me with the means to effect change. I also might try to implement integrative thinking and try to find a solution that does not compromise but rather incorporates the most important points of opposing solutions to the lack of technology (Martin, 2009).
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2006). Catching the third ICT Wave. Queen’s University Education Letter, 1-3.
Martin, R. L. (2009). The opposable mind: Winning through integrative thinking. Harvard Business Press.
I loved your analysis and noted many of the same observations as you did in case 5. Your statement “I also heard common frustrations regarding time, teachers’ skill set, and an overall lack of knowledge. What I didn’t hear was a lack of access to technology” really stood out for me. Teacher skill in areas of ICT are directly impacting our students learning of these technological skills. The International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS) is a new international study whose purpose is to assess the extent to which students know about, understand, and are able to use information and communications technology (ICT). When teachers face too many barriers and obstacles with using technology, they are more likely to not have those technologies used by their students in class. With technology as being one of the mathematical processes as found in the program of studies, can teachers really opt out saying they cannot or will not use technology because of their skills?
https://www.cmec.ca/322/International_Computer_and_Information_Literacy_Study_(ICILS)_.html