Review of EdTechNot:

(Great Assignment – understand the arguments of the non-technologists)

The Alliance for Childhood,in its mission statement on the Welcome page refers to “the daunting ethical choices of a high-tech future.” I wondered whether “ethical choices” might be a euphemism for some hidden agenda. What that might be I don’t know.

I read the PostGazette.com (?) article about the experts who challenge the educational advantages of technology.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04228/361969.stm
Experts concerned about children’s creative thinking

I read another article which challenged the over-reliance on technology

“THE LINK BETWEEN PLAY AND PROBLEM-SOLVING”
CHILDREN FROM BIRTH TO FIVE

Reaction:

JG:

The article states that “In recent years, many child development experts have voiced increasing concern over the fact that children are accorded little time or encouragement to engage in imaginative play. Too many children are overscheduled with school and other activities, according to these experts.”

I question who these “many child development experts” are and their research.

The article seems to make the case that creativity and technology are mutually exclusive. I challenge that. Many computer activities - technology activities in general, i.e. digital publishing, multimedia, international collaboration, et al) are wonderful opportunities for creativity, albeit a new medium of creativity, but the creative thinking process is similar.

Then I went to Projects

JG: I challenge this quote from Computers and Children “Millions of dollars are being spent to bring computers and the Internet to America's elementary school classrooms, yet there is little, if any, significant research showing academic gain from computer usage.”

Isn’t there research showing much gain and benefit, in cognitive and critical thinking and creative skills. I should pause to go out to identify this research, but I want to return to my Alliance navigation.

Child Advocates Challenge Current Ed Tech Standards

JG: The new report says “government and high-tech industry foisted expensive and unproven technology on schools, hurting children and undermining real technology literacy”

This is a valid point that gives Ed Tech a bad name. Too much was sold too fast without proper planning. And one might conclude that indirectly the children were hurt. If so, they were hurt only by missed opportunity. It is the faculty that may have been hurt the most as many were overwhelmed and pressured to use technology for which they were not properly trained. This in turn created anti-technologists who feared for their own “relevance” in the public school system. As Bob Dylan once said, “. . . the old road is rapidly fading . . . get out of the new road if you can’t lend a hand, the times they are a-changin’ .”

“The lack of evidence or an expert consensus that computers will improve student achievement—despite years of efforts by high-tech companies and government agencies to demonstrate otherwise—is itself compelling evidence of the need for change,” Tech Tonic states. “It’s time to scrap…national, state, and local policies that require all students and all teachers to use computers in every grade, and that eliminate even the possibility of alternatives.”

JG: The Fools Gold report points to evidence of some failed educational technology projects but no evidence of the failure of educational technology.

JG: The report Fools Gold lists these reasons for technology deficiencies. These area fall short because technology cannot address them or because technology actually adversely affects them.
In each case, cited in the report, I’ve attempted to offer an argument against the report’s logic.

• Use ideas and words meaningfully and creatively to make themselves understood and to understand others. This requires an environment that is rich in face-to-face verbal exchanges, including conversation, nursery rhymes, storytelling, and the sharing of books aloud. Orality is a precursor to literacy.

JG: Communication, electronic or otherwise, is a wonderful vehicle for creative language arts activities. Even face-to-face verbal exchanges are enhanced with technology since these two faces may be in opposite sides of the world. Orality is not mutually exclusive from technology. It can be augmented, complemented and even facilitated by technology

• Form close relationships with adults and other children. From these come the beginnings of empathy and human understanding.
JG: Again, there is nothing mutually exclusive between close relationships and technology. Electronic communication does not imply electronic relations. Real relations and real community is created with digital technology. These are not replacements for relationships, these are real relationships. Only the medium has changed. Remote mentoring is an excellent example of relationships enhanced by technology, i.e. experts in NYC can be conversing with students in California. Technology has broadened the students’ experiences.

• Read and respond appropriately to emotional and social cues and be able to work in groups.
JG: Technology is ideal to facilitate these goals

• Engage in imaginative play, alone and with others.

JG: Again, technology facilitates and enhances imaginative play.

• Express creativity through a range of activities, including visual arts, music, dance, etc.

JG: Perhaps dance and other performing arts can only be appreciated but not experienced. Visual arts, music are broadened.

• Feel at home exploring and caring about the world of nature.

JG: Again, one can explore and appreciate but not physically experience. Technology is never able to replace real-life local exploration; technology simply allows us to augment the local real-life exploration with exotic virtual exploration – with sound, pictures, video and written communication.

• Interact with the world through hands-on experiences, handcrafts, and other physically engaging activities.

JG: If one were to limit oneself to just the local community within some physical distance from the school children, one would miss out on at least being able to observe others’ hands-on experiences and handcrafts. In fact using modern interactive video collaboration techniques, students on opposite sides of the globe can be guiding each other through handcrafting projects and other physical activities.

• Quiet themselves for short times in order to digest experiences or engage in focused activity.

JG: As we have seen many times, the reflective journal writing, Blogs, emails and IM between students in different parts of the world is facilitated by technology, not hampered by it.

• Perceive patterns, follow simple directions, and solve simple problems.
JG: Digital media and technology projects that fit this description above, abound.

• Learn to attend to, focus on, and process experiences in an integrated way through motor, sensory, and affective pathways

JG: This is where I believe some of the best future technological advantages lie. It is in the application of gaming activity (metaphor) to serious K-12 curricula. Just as today’s PlayStation and X-Box games challenge students’ motor, sensory, etc. skills, so can (will) tomorrows Algebra and Social Studies lessons.