It is pointed out by those who oppose what they see as an overuse of technology in the classroom that it is unaffordable, supplanting more critical needs in the classroom. Cuban, Kirkpatrick and Peck (2001) argue that teachers do not have time to incorporate expensive technologies and that the industrial revolution model of the classroom persists despite the money spent on educational technologies. They do acknowledge, however, the possibility of a “slow revolution.” The consistent climb of internet, computer and smartphone usage leads one to believe this is indeed occurring and the question is not if schools should use technology, but how they should use it.
The latest data demonstrates the former point. Since Cuban, et al wrote of the difficulties in incorporating technology in 2001, internet usage has become more ubiquitous. Household usage has climbed from just over half of households in the United States to over 71% in 2011. The usage among those under 35 is even higher, and the trends demonstrate a steady increase in internet usage (File, 2013). The fact is that the vast majority are already using modern communication technology, which means the learning curve is far less than it needs to be.
Even education technology critic Oppenheimer (2007) acknowledges that there is some benefit to technology in his critique. He is saying that computers should not supplant, but enhance existing education when applicable, while being wary of hucksters who seek to sell schools on their latest gadgets. He further states that “it’s just not a big deal to learn how to use a computer” (Booknoise.net, 2007). This seems to argue that in the six years between the two critiques, it has become easier to use technology in the classroom.
One thing that there is scholarly agreement on is that technology must have a use in the classroom for it to be implemented. This seems to be obvious, but even advocates do not want to see the proliferation of educational gadgets and software for the sake of using technology (Bucci, Copenhaver, Johnson, Lehman & O’Brien, 2003) (Bransford, Lin & Schwartz, 2000). But, when applied correctly, a study by Kashy, Thoennessen, Tsai, Davis & Wolfe in 1998 shows that the networking technology we take for granted today can increase student achievement by 18%.
What needs to be done is to incorporate what is already available, for free in many cases, to make classrooms more efficient. Internet searches can streamline student-focused research. Digital communication like email, texts or social media can provide quick assessment feedback. Tools like Prezi and YouTube can allow teachers to quickly flip a classroom. All of these shortcuts allow students more valuable classroom time for critical thought and discussion (Gullen & Zimmerman, 2013).
While some argue that technology in the classroom is costly and overblown, others will tell you that it is a necessary investment and transformative. There is a middle ground to be had here. Schools should not have a vast technology budget that supplants other programs, but there absolutely needs to be smart, targeted investment that acknowledges the tools that are used every day by most people.
References
Booknoise.net. (2007). Q&A with Todd Oppenheimer. Retrieved from http://www.booknoise.net/ on August 25, 2007.
Bransford, J., Lin, X. & Schwartz, D. (2000). Technology, learning, and schools: comments on articles by Tom Carroll and Gerald Bracey. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(1).
Bucci, T.T., Copenhaver, J., Johnson, L., Lehman, B. & O’Brien, T. (2003). Technology integration: connections to educational theories. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(1), 30-46.
Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.
Gullen, K., & Zimmerman, H. (2013). Saving time with technology (benefits of infusing technology into instruction). Educational Leadership, (6).
File, T. (2013). Computer and internet use in the united states. Current Population Survey Reports. US Census Bureau.
Kashy, E., Thoennessen, M., Tsai, Y., Davis, N. E. & Wolfe, S. L. (1998). Using networked tools to promote student success in large classes. Journal of Engineering Education, 87(4), 385-390.
Oppenheimer, T. (2007). The flickering mind: Saving education from the false promise of technology. Random House LLC.
No comments:
Post a Comment