Reading/Video Reflection

Lynn Myers
January 23, 2010

Module #1—Reading/Video Reflection for a summary of the article or video

#1 Summary: Digital Learning Environments: Student Research Projects: By Jon Orech

This brief article opens with a description of the typical high school research project: research both sides of a controversial issue and develop an argument supported by that research. Orech seems critical of this type of project and provides a practical list of alternative, technology tools that every student should be taught to facilitate the electronic research process, with a brief description of the features of each. These tools include: a Delicious account, Google Reader; custom RSS search; Technorati search, a search engine for Blogs; link RSS feeds to Google Reader; and search the invisible web. Orech’s suggestions focus on using the tools of technology to engage students and teach them how to use the technology more effectively. Since they’re going to Google anyway, why not help them learn to use Google in more effective ways? Technorati’s Authority rating help students understand why it is critical to select reliable sources and show them a real world situation where the authority of the source is examined. Orech did not discuss what he expected for a final product from students after using these technology tools.

#2 Summary:

The Future of Learning Institutions in a Digital Age by Cathy N. Davidson
and David Theo Goldberg with the assistance of Zoë Marie Jones
The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning

This extensive report examines the relationship between technology and education. One of the fundamental questions is why technology has advanced so rapidly and changed our lives so dramatically, but has had so little meaningful impact on schools.
Modes of learning have changed dramatically over the past two decades—our sources of information, the ways we exchange and interact with information, how information informs and shapes us. But our schools—how we teach, where we teach, who we teach, who teaches, who administers, and who services—have changed mostly around the edges. The fundamental aspects of learning institutions remain remarkably familiar and have done so for something like two hundred years or more. Ichabod Crane, that parody of bad teaching in Washington Irving’s classic short story “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” (1820), could walk into most college classrooms today and know exactly where to stand and how to address his class.

The report details specific ways technology has changed our lives and what effect it has and should have on individuals and schools. The authors contend that it is not the technology in itself that is revolutionary, but the “potential for shared and interactive learning,” Collaboration, shared authorship and shared learning are keys to this new learning. Rather than the traditional education model of top down learning (an expert lectures his/her students, filling them with information, presumably unchanging truths), knowledge is no longer static: changing as rapidly as technology. Instead, we should develop participatory learning which is “about a process and not a final product.” The report also explores the “mismatch between the excitement generated by informal learning and the routinization of learning so common to many of our institutions of formal education.” Another problem integral to technology is “distinguishing good …sources from those that are questionable.” The digital divide will need to be addressed as well:
In the United States, incarceration correlates with poverty and digital access correlates with educational opportunity and wealth. Despite government pronouncements to the contrary, “digital divide” is not just an old concept but a current reality.

The report ends with a list of examples of the few schools and programs that are radically restructuring the learning environment relying on technology.

Summary #3: Future of Learning: How Technology is Transforming Public Schools

The Committee on Education and Labor’s 2009 panel discussion focuses on the potential of technology to improve student engagement and achievement and reduce drop-out rates. The discussion opens with committee Chairman George Miller’s comments on the future of learning. He claims that future employers will be looking for students who can work in a variety of environments, are comfortable with diversity and can effectively solve problems. He contends that “today’s kindergarten students are not prepared for this” future. The panel consists of educators, business people and technological experts. The panelists share several key conclusions. First, they agree that we need to revamp our education system, that more students will require college degrees, and that all students will need to use technology to research, analyze and create. Several presenters discussed the positive transformative effect when their school systems provided laptops for all students. The presenters also agreed that technology alone will not transform learning and teaching, that high quality, ongoing professional development is the key to success. Presenters shared the conclusion that the digital divide is very real and hits the poor and rural students hardest and agree that technology is an equalizer for disadvantaged students. Technology also allows teachers to reach students with various rates of learning and learning styles. Technology allows for more active learning and collaboration which also requires a shift in paradigm amongst teachers, from the traditional teacher in the front lecturing to a collaborative classroom. In an interesting note, when asked what the government can do to facilitate this transformation, one teacher answered: funding (and everyone laughed).

Common Threads:
The common thread between the three works is the potential of technology to revolutionize teaching and learning. All three allude to the fact that while technology has revolutionized our students’ world, the classroom has remained virtually unchanged. In many cases, technology is used simply to facilitate doing things the way they have always be done. For example, writing research papers and structuring classrooms with teachers in charge and students passively acquiring knowledge. There needs to be systemic change in education if we are to engage students, reach students with various backgrounds and learning styles, curb the drop-out rate, and prepare students for the future.


My thoughts:
Orech’s criticism of the typical high school research paper is well-founded. I taught college Freshman English for almost 20 years; teaching students to write research papers was a continual lesson in frustration—they hate writing them, many write them poorly, and they promptly forget everything they learn because they don’t use those skills again for a year or two. So I agree that the change in teaching needs to go deeper than using electronic sources to complete the same old tired assignments. However, I am concerned that students do not know how to write. Good writing requires critical thinking skills and is a powerful tool, one employers relish. I often see technology used to replace writing, for example a PowerPoint instead of a paper. While I think varying the final product is often helpful, at the risk of sounding like the dinosaur I am, students still need to learn to write. In a different vein, the digital divide is very real at FSK High School. One of our hardest working seniors spends every afternoon in the media center, trying to complete his AP projects on our computers because he does not have computer access at home. I have stayed until 5:00 or 6:00 to allow him to finish a project because I know how badly he wants to do well and that without a computer his work will not be at the same level as the other students who have computer access. On the other end of the spectrum, some of our students are completely wired: IPods, cell phones, computers, and even parents who are computer specialists of various stripes. However, not to minimize the dark reality of the digital divide, I also see the wired students as limited in their ability to use technology effectively, particularly when it comes to evaluating information and using information critically to solve problems. This relates to a common thread in the articles/videos, that ongoing professional development is essential if we are to use technology effectively in the classroom to prepare students for the critical thinking skills they will need in the future. Access to technology is critical; restructuring education to include technology and collaboration is also critical, but critical thinking skills are equally critical.