Knowledge is so powerful and after reading these article,
it caused me to look back at the way things have changed. I started my journey
in education back in 2007. There had been so many things that have changed in
the course of this time. The school systems have done a complete makeover and
they are consistently transforming even at this moment. When I first started
teaching in the classroom, there were limited technology, but it had started to
evolve. In some instances, I agree with some of the
changes, but not all. Yes, change is needed in education, because the world is
changing daily. In order for our students to prosper, we must equip them with knowledge
and understanding. Change agents tend to interact most effectively and most
often with social statuses similar to their own (Rogers,1963).
Innovativeness
is the degree to which an individual relatively early in adopting new ideas
when compared to others of his social system (Rogers, 1963). Our students should leave school ready to partake
in society in every aspect. Bloom’s Taxonomy set the path on classifying
educational goals and objectives (Bloom, Englehart, Furst, Hill, &
Krathwohl, 1956). Using Bloom’s in my class years back, as well as today, enables
me to identify what my students are strong in and it also identifies where they’re
disadvantages are on particular subjects. Students can “know” about a topic or
subject at different levels (Garavalia, Hummel, Wiley, & Huitt, 1999).
Technology is completely transforming education on all
altitudes. So many districts are shying away from consistently drilling
students with pencil and paper. A few years ago, my district required the
students to complete assessments on computer over paper test. They wanted the
students to become acclimated to taking exams online over on paper. We all know
that most kids are accustomed to gaming and any form of technology. I’ve
examined my own children, as well as, my students and I’ve formed the analogy that
anything computer based with grasp their attention faster than any book,
puzzle, etc. The new ideas, compared to the past, have potentially greater
precision, specificity, clarity, and above all greater learning power (Fullan & Langworthy,2014). With anything, there will be some positive outcomes, and also some
negative outcomes. The teacher in me still feels that students should be familiarized
to maneuver both forms of learning. Technology
is a great source to help close the learning gaps, but it could be a crutch moreover.
The different pedagogies helped me see that technology is layered on top of
content delivery, which will help support required curricular content (Fullan
& Langworthy,2014).
It takes
much patience and motivation to acclimate our students to embed technology in
day to day lessons. If teachers aren’t intrigued to change, it will cause the
students to struggle at learning new ways to integrate technology. Most novice
teachers are struck in the way they first started teaching and are not willing
to change. Research has shown that even the
least-experienced teachers can provide more depth and learning-style
differentiation if they effectively use educational technology to teach (Kuhn, 2008). Technology can open
so many doors in a school system. It could even help curve behavior issues and
help students with low self-esteem concerns. Educational
technology gives new meaning and utility to long-established educational
paradigms (Kuhn, 2008).
References:
Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam:
How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from
https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf
Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and
media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search
Premier database.
Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the
cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta
State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf
Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in
class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(1), 18-21. Retrieved from
Academic Search Premier database.
Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal
of Cooperative Extension,
1(2), 69-75. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf
