The article that stood out the most to me would be The Adoption Process. I substitute a good bit in my free time to help get more “hands-on” experience in the classroom and often times I see more seasoned teachers struggle with the new technology in their classrooms. Here recently I substituted in a library and saw boxes and boxes of technology, including a 3-D printer, that looked untouched. I asked administrators how long this technology had been sitting there, and they informed me that it had collected dust for almost two years. As someone who is passionate about instructional technology and the future of the classroom, I was really bothered by this situation. What I have come to realize is that funds are often allocated for such technology, but the funds are rarely allocated for proper training of new technology.
I feel like the situation above is comparable to the idea of the swamp referenced in A Rich Seam. Some schools have the technology, but they do not have the means to use it. Whereas, some schools have the means to use the technology but simply can not find the funds to get it. More seasoned teachers give up when trying to figure it out, leaving the new technology to collect dust as they go back to their white boards and expo markers. This creates a murky swamp of the state feeling like they have done their part in the implementation of technology in public schools, but leaving teachers left to drown in the immense amount of learning they need to effectively implement the new technology.
The solution I believe could be found in the articles we were required to read. I believe that teachers should first spend their time developing new pedagogical theories that best fit their classrooms, while making technology implementation one of their top priorities. I was personally only in the education program for a very brief time, but during that time I remember studying Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Bloom’s Taxonomy as if it was the Bible to Education. I feel that if the teacher’s journey started with a collaboration of those two very important theories and studying digital literacy, the future of the classroom could look a lot different.
Lacey,
ReplyDeleteYour observation about technology purchased, and remaining unused, or idle most of the time, is neither a new phenomena, or an infrequent one, reflecting a poorly defined process for the acquisition and utilization of technology.
Mature organizations recognize that when evaluating the purchase of new technology they need to incorporate the total lifetime cost of the technology in the budget request including education, estimated hours for an organizational SME (subject matter expert) for the technology who can act as champion and resource for it, and in the example of your 3-d printer, an annual cost of consumables required to use it.
As you noted, technology should follow the process, rather than proceeding it, and the pedagogy needs to be defined that will incorporate it as an enabler, along with the benefits that it will bring to the instructional process.
As a senior executive often responsible for technology, I have always ensure that the executive responsible for requesting technology, is responsible from a performance perspective for deploying it successfully. Doing so ensures that technology purchased, and not used, would seldom lead to movement up the career ladder. It also makes sure that technology requests are fully loaded for all the costs required for a successful implementation.
Careful research and evaluation, both by those recommending it, and those who will eventually have to use it, as you have alluded to in your post, should always be part of the initial selection process, so that long before time is wasted on obtaining approval to spend, consensus is reached on the fit and benefits of the proposed technology.
Good post!
Bob