Posts
When a study released this year concluded that educational software doesn't boost test scores, the response on part of the industry was fairly predictable. Take the study with a grain of salt, Mark Schneiderman, a director at the Software and Information Industry Association told reporters. The industry, it seems, is no longer “proud to be the largest commercial supporter of this important study” as one chief executive the organization represents said three years ago.[1]
This latest report serves to highlight the lack of vision for technology in education. Certainly, the most successful initiative was the uninspired roll-out of computer and internet access in schools (see charts). Beyond this, technology's role has been haphazard. Where other efforts have been well-intended, their general inefficiency negates the expense: note library subscriptions to vast databases and their limited use beyond what is forced upon students or the interest in smartboards, digital touchscreens that take place of overhead projectors and whiteboards, without any accompanying leap in teaching.
Laptops and computer labs used to trudge through presentations and the accompanying worksheet does not hint at any return on investment. Even the push for distance learning as an alternative for students is more of a distraction from the reality of poor engagement in the classroom than a substantive stand-alone solution.
A flip of thought
The lack of innovation is at most a problem of thought. Now, technology is pursued to help students learn better. The most practical opportunities involve helping teachers teach better. The flip of thought is significant: if one can reduce the time teachers need – waste is more appropriate – as the “lowliest of bureaucrats,” more time can be directed at creating engaging lessons, nullifying the current arrangement to make learning fun. The last innovation on this front is the Scantron and its enduring bubble tests. Automated is the precise word here, whether it is simply taking the ease of Scantrons one step farther by automatically adding the grades into a teacher's gradebook or more intensive endeavors. Digitizing internal forms and reducing redundancies in information systems serves the same end.
The most pronounced opportunities are in streamlining classes that are targeted to
quantifiable student needs. Harnessing “real data” and making use of pre-tests to more effectively direct classes is ideal. Pearson Education sells the Classroom Performance System – a nifty wireless remote with letters A through H for each student and software for teachers that allow them to assemble questions and assessments and sorting through the results in real-time. On the fly, the program can report responses to impromptu questions; the prospect gives a whole new meaning to “Did you get what I'm saying?” If yes, press A.
The Wall Street Journal reports in a whimsical article on schools that are now employing automated phone systems that call parents to notify them based on pre-programmed circumstances. They range from the helpful, school closings, the informative, John scored a C on his math quiz, and the annoying, he has but one dollar left on his lunch account – replayed to every phone number on the student's contact list.[2]
This latest report serves to highlight the lack of vision for technology in education. Certainly, the most successful initiative was the uninspired roll-out of computer and internet access in schools (see charts). Beyond this, technology's role has been haphazard. Where other efforts have been well-intended, their general inefficiency negates the expense: note library subscriptions to vast databases and their limited use beyond what is forced upon students or the interest in smartboards, digital touchscreens that take place of overhead projectors and whiteboards, without any accompanying leap in teaching.
Laptops and computer labs used to trudge through presentations and the accompanying worksheet does not hint at any return on investment. Even the push for distance learning as an alternative for students is more of a distraction from the reality of poor engagement in the classroom than a substantive stand-alone solution.
A flip of thought
The lack of innovation is at most a problem of thought. Now, technology is pursued to help students learn better. The most practical opportunities involve helping teachers teach better. The flip of thought is significant: if one can reduce the time teachers need – waste is more appropriate – as the “lowliest of bureaucrats,” more time can be directed at creating engaging lessons, nullifying the current arrangement to make learning fun. The last innovation on this front is the Scantron and its enduring bubble tests. Automated is the precise word here, whether it is simply taking the ease of Scantrons one step farther by automatically adding the grades into a teacher's gradebook or more intensive endeavors. Digitizing internal forms and reducing redundancies in information systems serves the same end.
The most pronounced opportunities are in streamlining classes that are targeted to
quantifiable student needs. Harnessing “real data” and making use of pre-tests to more effectively direct classes is ideal. Pearson Education sells the Classroom Performance System – a nifty wireless remote with letters A through H for each student and software for teachers that allow them to assemble questions and assessments and sorting through the results in real-time. On the fly, the program can report responses to impromptu questions; the prospect gives a whole new meaning to “Did you get what I'm saying?” If yes, press A.The Wall Street Journal reports in a whimsical article on schools that are now employing automated phone systems that call parents to notify them based on pre-programmed circumstances. They range from the helpful, school closings, the informative, John scored a C on his math quiz, and the annoying, he has but one dollar left on his lunch account – replayed to every phone number on the student's contact list.[2]
All of this does not discount the need for technology education; yes, students today are the beneficiaries of technological renaissance and yes, as Dr. Kimberley Ketterer writes in Learning & Leading With Technology, students will need to be adept at making the most of it all. But no, schools need not be on the leading edge, or as her counterpart, Rich Gibson, puts it the subsidization of the technology industry's “bloat.”[3] Programs that are often out of reach for individual students deserve the investment; technology that is nothing more than excuse to get out of class do not. Anyways, what is one to do when it all breaks down?
[1] Software’s Efficacy on Tests in Doubt. Amit R. Paley. Washington Post. 5 April 2007.
[2] Schools Discover Automated Calling and Go Wild. Ellen Gamerman. The Wall Street Journal. http://tinyurl.com/2js4m9.
[3] Should Schools Strive to Be on the Leading Edge? Point/Counterpoint. Dr. Kimberley Ketterer and Rich Gibson. Learning & Leading with Technology. October 2005.
No comments:
Post a Comment