Post one unique comment, question, or observation to the class blog relating to the three readings (see the assignments page). If your comment relates to a specific article, be sure to identify it.
I read "Life is no panacea". I agree with Palmquist when he says that technology provides a rich set of tools that can enhance teaching and learning. It truly can enhance a class and make students more interested in the topic at hand, as long as it is not used excessively. Excessive use of technology can have the opposite effect.
I had to laugh (inwardly) when I read about the view "that money spent on technology, and time spent by students using technology, are money and time wasted" (How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School p194 ). When I was in high school, some fellow students and I were invited to give feedback to the county school officials. One question they asked was how the county should spend technology dollars. We unanimously (and without prior agreement) replied that they should spend the money on teacher salaries, not on technology! No doubt this was the result of some pretty poor technology instruction/integration in our schools. I'm glad that both of our readings addressed that this issue exists around technology in classrooms, and that the How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School reading gave concrete examples showing that technology can be effective. (Adam Hoppe)
After reading "Life is No Panacea" I started to think about how truly helpful technology is the in the classroom. I feel that there is somewhat of a happy medium needed. While powerpoints and games can help aide teaching, I think that a line should be drawn. If we rely too heavily on computers, students will depend on things like spellcheck and online grammar aids to write papers. So while, technology is certainly a useful tool in the classroom, moderation is key.
I'd really like to touch on a part of what Palmquist had said in his article, "Life is No Panacea." He states that "others from less privileged backgrounds express uncertainty about using the latest technologies." We can't just assume that everyone can access a computer as easily as we can, and we need to consider how much technology should play a role in these future students' lives. There are many downsides to relying on technology to teach students including the abuse of computers (using them to play games, etc.), not a big enough budget to give every student the technology needed, and more. I know that teachers should start using technology to their advantage if they are situated in an area where it is present, but like Amy said, there should be a limit. Also, with under-privileged schools, I think more funding needs to go towards technology so that those students can have the opportunity to experience what new technology is out there for them.
I have read several articles of how technology in the classroom is destructive to a child's development, how it encourages a child to rely on other matters as opposed to discovering and doing on his or her own. Reading these readings gave me a new perspective that led to me thinking about how based on technology our society is becoming. I feel that technology in the classroom is important, especially for those under-privileged children who don't have the opportunities at home to be introduced to different mediums of technology. However, as pretty much everyone above me addressed, excess use of technology can in fact be harmful to a child's development.
After reading the articles, I think that technology is important in the classroom but only to a certain extent. I agree with Palmquist's view of technology as a tool that provides opportunities (Technology is No Panacea). However, I think that having computer-based tutors (Technology to Support Learning) and similar technology is a bad idea. I feel that heavily relying on technology limits the interaction between students and teachers and loses information in the process.
Like others have said, after reading the articles I believe that technology should be used in moderation. I think it is a great tool for both teachers and students, however, it should not be relied on too heavily. I also believe that technology should not be used as much with younger students. Although technology is important for all ages, I feel as though there are many more things young children need to be learning and focusing on before they start using it excessively. I think that the use of technology should gradually increase as children get older.
After having read "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School" I had one big question in mind-- why haven't I ever heard of any of these programs? Along those same lines, who is receiving the benefits of these learning tools? In the program descriptions in the article, there is mention of how many different schools participate, but little note about which schools are able to use them. Are these programs primarily used in higher income areas, or in lower ones? While I'm not sure of this answer I think that in creating programs like these it's important to consider which students will benefit most from the experience and make it accessible to them as well as the rest of the population.
When I read "Technology is no panacea..." I found the contrasting views about incorporating technology in schools to be interesting. Reflecting on my high school experience, I can remember the varying attitudes teachers had about technology. I had a middle-aged English teacher that was about 95% against technology, while the next year I had a younger English teacher that relied heavily on the perks that technology has to offer. I feel that technology is useful and exploration of how it is helpful in a class setting should continue. However, I believe technology is not a replacement method of teaching, and should be used within reason.
As others have said, I think that Technology is a great tool to be used in the classroom, but only to a certain extent. While students certainly become engaged while playing an educational computer game, or testing their knowledge while playing jeopardy with powerpoint, it is important to make sure that classrooms do not become too dependent on technology. Direct instruction from the teacher, not a computer based tutor or instructional video, is essential for students to learn all that they can.
In How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School on page 194 it is stated that “technologies are interactive,” and that “it is now easier to create environments in which students can learn by doing.” While it is true that computer software and the internet bring to our desks the ability to dissect a frog, for instance, without actually dissecting a frog, I have to argue that the students aren’t really learning by doing. These pseudo-environments are hardly comparable to the real environment of a dissecting lab. It is nice to have this virtual ability, and while I doubt it will happen, I hope that hands on classrooms do not become obsolete.
I have to say that Palmquist's "Technology is no Panacea" almost perfectly sums up my attitude towards education in the classroom. It's a shame that so many teachers have been turned off by past failed attempts at integrating technology into their classrooms. There are so many ways that students can benefit from technology in the classroom. I absolutely agree that nothing can replace teacher-student interaction, but after spending many hours working with my peers in a special education classroom in high school, I've seen how much technology can help with differentiating instruction. It allows students to interact with the material in a new and different way. In addition, we're already to the point where reliance on technology makes up a huge part of our society. Students are going to need to learn how to take advantage of it.
In reading "Technology is no panacea..." I was surprised by the negative light in which technology was portrayed. Since technology is rapidly becoming a more prominent part of communication I think it is extremely important to start familiarizing students with it at a young age. Most of us are going to be working with elementary school children who likely have not yet developed significant differences in familiarity with technology, and I think it is important to incorporate technology and keep them on the same level as they need more advanced skills in the future.
I thought that in his article, "Technology is No Panacea," Mike Palmquist made a very good point in that some kids seem to have been "born with a silver mouse in their hands." It is very true that some children are more priviledged in that their parents can afford to buy them all the latest technologies, whether or not their child needs it or if it is even appropriate for a young child to have such things. Other, less fortunate students, do not have the opportunity to experiment with technology outside of the classroom. Teachers must always be aware that they may have a student who does not know how to use a computer and thus is less likely to feel confident in using this technology to complete school work. I can attest to this as I have experienced a similar situation myself. When I was a freshman at JMU, we had to complete several technology tests that judged our ability to work with different Microsoft applications. I had no problem doing the Word and Power Point tests, but when I got to the Excel test I suddenly felt scared and worthless because I had never once used Excel before. Passing these tests were mandatory before we were allowed to register for classes for our sophomore year. I took the test and obviously failed it because I had never received instruction on how to use Excel. At this point I had to wonder why I had never been taught Excel before (at JMU) if it was clearly an integral part of our education. Luckily we were given two chances to pass each test so I had a friend tutor me in how to use Excel before I took it again. I passed the test the second time and have since (6 years later) never used Excel again. Teachers absolutly have to be aware that not everyone is on the same level of expertise when it comes to technology and must only incorporate technology into a lesson if they are sure that the entire class will feel comfortable in using the technology or if the teacher plans on teaching the students how to use it first.
Palmquist's comment on the "technology gap" resonated the most with me. While there is no question that computers and other technological advancements are in the lesson plans, it is unfortunate that such resources are so unevenly distributed.
One of my most vivid memories of middle school involved a teacher requiring that a final paper be typed on a computer. Library computers were available after school, but staying late was not an option if, like many of us, you had to ride the bus home. I remember this being particularly troubling to my classmates who only had computer access during school hours.
These days it seems like everyone has a computer, but I highly doubt that every one of our potential students will have been "born with a silver mouse in their hands." I think this point is something to constantly consider as we move toward integrating technology into our classrooms.
In "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School" I liked how it emphasized how important technology is for connecting with the global community. I think teachers sometimes feel intimidated by new technology and therefore shy away from using it, or they might think that it's too time-consuming to learn how to use it properly. This chapter seems to encourage teachers not to take this approach but to look at technology as something that is necessary for students to learn how to work with in order to be effective members of a growing technological world. Teachers don't have to be technological geniuses in order to use technology in the classroom, but it is a teacher's duty to at least expose children to the technology that's out there. This doesn't mean using new technology in every lesson plan obviously, but striking a balance between traditional teaching methods and technology seems to be what will most benefit children of today.
After reading both the articles, it's clear to me that technology can play a very important role in education; whether teaching students how to use it or using technology to help students better understand the material. However, I don't believe that technology will ever replace the importance of a classroom environment and working with an actual person. Basically, I whole-heartedly agree with many of Palmquist's points in "Technology is no Panacea," but I also recognize many of helpful uses for technology, such as accomodating different learning styles and scaffolding, that the "How People Learn" article talks about.
I also read "Life is No Panacea" and found it extremely interesting. While I do see the positives of technology in the classroom I still have a hard tim accepting that it is the best way to teach. In my experience, while this may only apply to me, i feel that many times, when children use computers in the classroom, they spend more time trying to figure out how a program works than they do learning from it. I also have trouble with how impersonal it feels to learn through technology. Yes, technology provides opportunities, yes we can use it to our advantage, but I still feel that it can tend to take away from the feel of a classroom. Although, if a teacher is capable of integrating the technology into his or her classroom with little or no confusion and repetition I feel this could benefit the students.
18 comments:
I read "Life is no panacea". I agree with Palmquist when he says that technology provides a rich set of tools that can enhance teaching and learning. It truly can enhance a class and make students more interested in the topic at hand, as long as it is not used excessively. Excessive use of technology can have the opposite effect.
I had to laugh (inwardly) when I read about the view "that money spent on technology, and time spent by students using technology, are money and time wasted" (How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School p194 ). When I was in high school, some fellow students and I were invited to give feedback to the county school officials. One question they asked was how the county should spend technology dollars. We unanimously (and without prior agreement) replied that they should spend the money on teacher salaries, not on technology! No doubt this was the result of some pretty poor technology instruction/integration in our schools. I'm glad that both of our readings addressed that this issue exists around technology in classrooms, and that the How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School reading gave concrete examples showing that technology can be effective.
(Adam Hoppe)
After reading "Life is No Panacea" I started to think about how truly helpful technology is the in the classroom. I feel that there is somewhat of a happy medium needed. While powerpoints and games can help aide teaching, I think that a line should be drawn. If we rely too heavily on computers, students will depend on things like spellcheck and online grammar aids to write papers. So while, technology is certainly a useful tool in the classroom, moderation is key.
I'd really like to touch on a part of what Palmquist had said in his article, "Life is No Panacea." He states that "others from less privileged backgrounds express uncertainty about using the latest technologies." We can't just assume that everyone can access a computer as easily as we can, and we need to consider how much technology should play a role in these future students' lives. There are many downsides to relying on technology to teach students including the abuse of computers (using them to play games, etc.), not a big enough budget to give every student the technology needed, and more. I know that teachers should start using technology to their advantage if they are situated in an area where it is present, but like Amy said, there should be a limit. Also, with under-privileged schools, I think more funding needs to go towards technology so that those students can have the opportunity to experience what new technology is out there for them.
I have read several articles of how technology in the classroom is destructive to a child's development, how it encourages a child to rely on other matters as opposed to discovering and doing on his or her own. Reading these readings gave me a new perspective that led to me thinking about how based on technology our society is becoming. I feel that technology in the classroom is important, especially for those under-privileged children who don't have the opportunities at home to be introduced to different mediums of technology. However, as pretty much everyone above me addressed, excess use of technology can in fact be harmful to a child's development.
After reading the articles, I think that technology is important in the classroom but only to a certain extent. I agree with Palmquist's view of technology as a tool that provides opportunities (Technology is No Panacea). However, I think that having computer-based tutors (Technology to Support Learning) and similar technology is a bad idea. I feel that heavily relying on technology limits the interaction between students and teachers and loses information in the process.
Like others have said, after reading the articles I believe that technology should be used in moderation. I think it is a great tool for both teachers and students, however, it should not be relied on too heavily. I also believe that technology should not be used as much with younger students. Although technology is important for all ages, I feel as though there are many more things young children need to be learning and focusing on before they start using it excessively. I think that the use of technology should gradually increase as children get older.
After having read "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School" I had one big question in mind-- why haven't I ever heard of any of these programs? Along those same lines, who is receiving the benefits of these learning tools? In the program descriptions in the article, there is mention of how many different schools participate, but little note about which schools are able to use them. Are these programs primarily used in higher income areas, or in lower ones? While I'm not sure of this answer I think that in creating programs like these it's important to consider which students will benefit most from the experience and make it accessible to them as well as the rest of the population.
When I read "Technology is no panacea..." I found the contrasting views about incorporating technology in schools to be interesting. Reflecting on my high school experience, I can remember the varying attitudes teachers had about technology. I had a middle-aged English teacher that was about 95% against technology, while the next year I had a younger English teacher that relied heavily on the perks that technology has to offer. I feel that technology is useful and exploration of how it is helpful in a class setting should continue. However, I believe technology is not a replacement method of teaching, and should be used within reason.
As others have said, I think that Technology is a great tool to be used in the classroom, but only to a certain extent. While students certainly become engaged while playing an educational computer game, or testing their knowledge while playing jeopardy with powerpoint, it is important to make sure that classrooms do not become too dependent on technology. Direct instruction from the teacher, not a computer based tutor or instructional video, is essential for students to learn all that they can.
In How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School on page 194 it is stated that “technologies are interactive,” and that “it is now easier to create environments in which students can learn by doing.” While it is true that computer software and the internet bring to our desks the ability to dissect a frog, for instance, without actually dissecting a frog, I have to argue that the students aren’t really learning by doing. These pseudo-environments are hardly comparable to the real environment of a dissecting lab. It is nice to have this virtual ability, and while I doubt it will happen, I hope that hands on classrooms do not become obsolete.
I have to say that Palmquist's "Technology is no Panacea" almost perfectly sums up my attitude towards education in the classroom. It's a shame that so many teachers have been turned off by past failed attempts at integrating technology into their classrooms. There are so many ways that students can benefit from technology in the classroom. I absolutely agree that nothing can replace teacher-student interaction, but after spending many hours working with my peers in a special education classroom in high school, I've seen how much technology can help with differentiating instruction. It allows students to interact with the material in a new and different way.
In addition, we're already to the point where reliance on technology makes up a huge part of our society. Students are going to need to learn how to take advantage of it.
In reading "Technology is no panacea..." I was surprised by the negative light in which technology was portrayed. Since technology is rapidly becoming a more prominent part of communication I think it is extremely important to start familiarizing students with it at a young age. Most of us are going to be working with elementary school children who likely have not yet developed significant differences in familiarity with technology, and I think it is important to incorporate technology and keep them on the same level as they need more advanced skills in the future.
I thought that in his article, "Technology is No Panacea," Mike Palmquist made a very good point in that some kids seem to have been "born with a silver mouse in their hands." It is very true that some children are more priviledged in that their parents can afford to buy them all the latest technologies, whether or not their child needs it or if it is even appropriate for a young child to have such things. Other, less fortunate students, do not have the opportunity to experiment with technology outside of the classroom. Teachers must always be aware that they may have a student who does not know how to use a computer and thus is less likely to feel confident in using this technology to complete school work. I can attest to this as I have experienced a similar situation myself. When I was a freshman at JMU, we had to complete several technology tests that judged our ability to work with different Microsoft applications. I had no problem doing the Word and Power Point tests, but when I got to the Excel test I suddenly felt scared and worthless because I had never once used Excel before. Passing these tests were mandatory before we were allowed to register for classes for our sophomore year. I took the test and obviously failed it because I had never received instruction on how to use Excel. At this point I had to wonder why I had never been taught Excel before (at JMU) if it was clearly an integral part of our education. Luckily we were given two chances to pass each test so I had a friend tutor me in how to use Excel before I took it again. I passed the test the second time and have since (6 years later) never used Excel again. Teachers absolutly have to be aware that not everyone is on the same level of expertise when it comes to technology and must only incorporate technology into a lesson if they are sure that the entire class will feel comfortable in using the technology or if the teacher plans on teaching the students how to use it first.
Palmquist's comment on the "technology gap" resonated the most with me. While there is no question that computers and other technological advancements are in the lesson plans, it is unfortunate that such resources are so unevenly distributed.
One of my most vivid memories of middle school involved a teacher requiring that a final paper be typed on a computer. Library computers were available after school, but staying late was not an option if, like many of us, you had to ride the bus home. I remember this being particularly troubling to my classmates who only had computer access during school hours.
These days it seems like everyone has a computer, but I highly doubt that every one of our potential students will have been "born with a silver mouse in their hands." I think this point is something to constantly consider as we move toward integrating technology into our classrooms.
In "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School" I liked how it emphasized how important technology is for connecting with the global community. I think teachers sometimes feel intimidated by new technology and therefore shy away from using it, or they might think that it's too time-consuming to learn how to use it properly. This chapter seems to encourage teachers not to take this approach but to look at technology as something that is necessary for students to learn how to work with in order to be effective members of a growing technological world. Teachers don't have to be technological geniuses in order to use technology in the classroom, but it is a teacher's duty to at least expose children to the technology that's out there. This doesn't mean using new technology in every lesson plan obviously, but striking a balance between traditional teaching methods and technology seems to be what will most benefit children of today.
After reading both the articles, it's clear to me that technology can play a very important role in education; whether teaching students how to use it or using technology to help students better understand the material. However, I don't believe that technology will ever replace the importance of a classroom environment and working with an actual person. Basically, I whole-heartedly agree with many of Palmquist's points in "Technology is no Panacea," but I also recognize many of helpful uses for technology, such as accomodating different learning styles and scaffolding, that the "How People Learn" article talks about.
I also read "Life is No Panacea" and found it extremely interesting. While I do see the positives of technology in the classroom I still have a hard tim accepting that it is the best way to teach. In my experience, while this may only apply to me, i feel that many times, when children use computers in the classroom, they spend more time trying to figure out how a program works than they do learning from it. I also have trouble with how impersonal it feels to learn through technology. Yes, technology provides opportunities, yes we can use it to our advantage, but I still feel that it can tend to take away from the feel of a classroom. Although, if a teacher is capable of integrating the technology into his or her classroom with little or no confusion and repetition I feel this could benefit the students.
Post a Comment