Technology Intentions within Education

OBJECTIVE vs. SUBJECTive

In the book, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, there is an emphasis of not only setting objectives for our students but have students being a part of the objective creation process.  “When teachers communicate objectives for student learning, students can see more easily the connections between what they are doing in class and what they are supposed to learn” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).  This impacted me because, I often will place my objectives on the board; maybe have the students read it with me, but then throw it in then set it aside as we venture off into activities over the unit.  I like how they express ideas of implementing technology to make these objective more engaging and more important than them having a set place on my board for when administrators walk in to visit the class. 

I enjoyed the use of the KWL charts, and even better, the KWHL charts, and how the implemented Google Docs as well as the Kidspiration software to help the organizing of where the students are presently with their learning and where they’re going.  At the same time I’m very fearful of doing this because I can see this taking a lot of time compared to what else can be taught in the classroom.  I can see the being a huge battle between the curricular objectives versus the plain subject matter.  However, the next section supports the objective view.

What came first? The technology or the education?

Towards the end of the article, The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievement:  What the most current research has to say, there were two main quotes that struck, especially has I had read the material in the paragraphs above. The first, “’One of the enduring difficulties about technology and education…is that a lot of people think about the technology first and the education later’” (Schacter, 1999).   It upsets me that there are teachers who think they’re doing their students a favor by providing computer time for their students.  And I believe they think that because the activities planned on the computers, laptops or any other device provide is content related material that learning is happening.  I think students are a powerful tool and should be used as interactive tool, not a really expensive textbook.  There are so many tools to allow the students to create and interact with on these devices. 

The second quote, “There is, however, evidence in some of these studies that learning technology is … ineffective when the learning objectives are unclear and the focus of the technology use is diffuse” (Schacter, 1999).  To again, place an emphasis on the objectives, have students see what they will be doing on electronic devices will tie into their learning goals.  I believe a real challenge would be to have teachers use electronic tools, websites, or apps that are not driven by specific content area.  Allow the students to make it a part of the content area by having them create or reflect on their learning or even add to their learning. 

Conclusion

With set objects, created by both the student and the teacher, the entire class is then working in a synergized format to allow more learning than if it was just teacher led.  Then, having technology enhance the learning by utilizing enhanced tools of technology to create, not only job skills, but reflection masterpieces of their learning.

Reference: 

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Chapters 1, 15-38.

Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology. Retrieved from http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf.