Blog Entry #4
Your thoughts on the reading/Will Richardson's speech:
Richardson's speech was informative, creative, and well organized. He spoke much of innovation and gave some insight into applications of the future that will become the norm. I do think that many of his points were valid and considered more thought. However, some of his point s did seem rather extreme, and possibly detrimental. For example, could there be repercussions from consistently reading from a digital screen? How would an optometrist react react to Richardson's hypothesis about reading and writing taking place only in a digital world in the future? Wouldn't replacing textbooks due to wear and tear be significantly less expensive than replacing a digital readers? Sure students would be given training on how to use their new tools, but kids are kids at the end of the day; even when they're kids that can program an entire video game in an evening and have classmates playing them the next day. On the other hand, would downloading updated textbooks be less expensive than purchasing and shipping hundreds of textbooks every 5-10 years? Perhaps digital readers would provide more up to date scientific, historical, etc… writings.
When experts, such as Richardson discuss the eminent change in how writing is taught, I get a little uneasy in my skin, as I work with 3-5 year olds that are developing their fine muscles in order to be able to print in an age appropriate manner. Merely learning to write with a keyboard would do a disservice to future students and their muscle development. Perhaps cursive writing could become obsolete, but students should certainly be able to print using pen/pencil and paper. We've already taken away tying shoes with the implementation of Velcro and now we could take away the dexterity necessary to print as well. Future students aren't going to be able to button their clothing if we keep taking away their fine motor work.
Basically, I agree that novel technological resources can, will, and should change learning; but I don't think that means we have to throw everything else out the window. The innovators that came up with these resources learned to read and write with books and paper, played outside after school, and were given a chance to create during arts classes. I just don't want education to become so technological that it can never go back to more routine, and valid instruction techniques.
I certainly know from experience, that once you have the new convenience of some novel technology, you can't imagine going back. For example, I have a DVR cable package in my home. It's amazing. I can never go back to regular cable at this point. I've become overly accustomed to watching prime time Thursday evening shows on Sunday afternoons and watching Saturday Night Live on a Wednesday afternoon.
Finally, and I know it's been mentioned before, but I still feel that teachers are using technology in their classrooms out of obligation. It's a delicate to walk during lesson planning between using technology to enhance learning, and using technology to check off a box in the state standards or in your employee review. It's a line that I have been dancing on since I began this degree 5 years ago, and I'm not always sure I navigated the course with precision.
I don't know why this is in all caps all of the sudden. Sorry, Hope it's still readable for you.
ReplyDeleteYou made some good points! You even made me laugh when you said that kids won't be able to button their own clothes! :) You are right when it comes to the importance of being able to physically write, learn how to spell, etc. These are skills that we need to have. But, technology is a great tool for kids in need who can't physically write or have other disabilities. These kids rely on technology to give them a voice. And I do think that being able to load books would be beneficial because the information would always be current. I think that students automatically dismiss a whole book if there is information in it that is old or outdated.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering why you were yelling! ;)
ReplyDeleteI liked that you pointed out how an optometrist would feel about all reading being done online and with digital readers. I know that I have trouble reading large amounts of text online. It's much easier, and less strain on my eyes, to print out an article.
I agree that a lot of teachers are using technology in their classrooms out of obligation. I know that there are several teachers in my school who this applies to. I still use paper for notes, handouts, etc. I think that there is a level of discomfort that comes with trying something new that is too much for some teachers. I also think that they WAY kids are being taught to write- with computers, spellcheck, etc. is hurting them. They are also not really being held accountable for plagiarism in younger grades, and a lot of times in high school as well. It's so easy for them to copy and paste something from the internet and it takes a lot of work for the teachers to check up on it.
Jessica - I think you made some great points. I thought a lot of the same things after reflecting on Richardson's speech. Using technology for the sake of checking of a box is a waste of everyone's time. Unfortunately, I think a lot of teachers don't realize when they are using technology incorrectly. I'm sure I have been guilty of using technology without a real purpose behind it. We hear that we are supposed to be using it, and so we find a way to force it into our lessons. I hope that at the very least, I can leave this class with a better understanding of how to meaningfully integrate technology, so when I do choose to use it, I can do it in a way that actually benefits students.
ReplyDeleteMany great points here. I wonder where we will be in 10 years. Will we have the problems of time, teacher education, access, etc. solved or will they just be bigger because the technology will always be changing? Students do need to play outside, write correctly, use the library, etc!!!!! The education system needs to change so that tools and education/support for teachers is more readily available in the classroom. They're doing it in other countries....why can't we do it here?
ReplyDeleteJessica,
ReplyDeleteSo true. I used to proctor SAT's and I stopped when the kids began taking over a half hour to complete their certification statement. It is about five sentences in which the students state that they are, in fact, who they say they are and the personal information they have submitted is correct. The students must write it in cursive, and over the years, it has become impossible for them to complete. One year, a proctor actually had to sit down with a student and write each letter of the alphabet in cursive, and have the student copy the letters over as they wrote the statement. Even I do not write in cursive anymore - my students do not always recognize the letters when they are in cursive (again, I teach 16 - 18 year old, non-special education students).
I remember hearing this discussion about the calculator, too. People said, "if students can use a calculator, then the sliderule will become obsolete." This statement became true, and so much more. But really...do we need a sliderule anymore...have we really lost anything? While the loss of sliderule skills does not seem important, so much more was lost with it. Each year, my students become more dependent upon calculators, and less knowledgeable about basic math. A student in my calculus based, advanced physics class should NOT be rushing to a calculator to determine 10% of a value, or multiply a value by one or two. Sometimes, my students will actually multiply something by one using their calculator! When they did this, they used to stop and say, "Oh, duh...I'm tired today." Now they don't think anything of it.
Calculators have made technology a lot more accessible to a lot more learners, but this has been at the expense of students gaining a deeper understanding of math. I wonder if the same thing won't turn out to be true in this "information age". The internet gives students access to more information than ever before, but will it be at the expense of depth of knowledge?