When we look at the classroom setting today, we may see something along the lines of SMART Board incorporation, computer carts, or iPads available to all students. Along with these technologies is teaching software and programs that we, as teachers, are expected to know how to use proficiently. With this expectation comes the expectation to teach our students how to use these programs proficiently in an efficient manner. As a future educator who is considering potential expectations set for me as I enter my future classroom, I think it is important to note how the odds seem stacked against us, as this generation of educators is caught in what I believe could be a technological limbo.
Before making this assumption, I first did some reflecting on my own experiences in the public education system. For the majority of this time- approximately K-7, technology was almost nonexistent. The only times that I had opportunity to use either a computer, tablet, etc., was during structured computer lab periods. By the time I finished high school, it was okay for students to use their phones as a resource in the classroom if the specific teacher permitted it, computer carts and SMART Boards were in fruition, and my school district signed a contract with Google to provide all the students with a Chromebook, which came into effect shortly after my graduation. I proceeded to check my experience against those of my colleagues to find that they came up in similar scenarios. In this way, there is a divide in the ability to use technology and be able to teach technology in an effective means.
The role of the teacher in the classroom is not necessarily changing. In fact, I don’t believe it’s changing so drastically that you couldn’t take a teacher from 50 years ago and bring them into the classroom of today. The standards and expectations haven’t changed much. However, the facilitation of learning has become an ever-going battle. That now begs the question, “What constitutes good teaching, and how do we assess students learning from technology versus from the teacher?”
One study, reviewed by former EdSurge Educational Journalist, Mary Jo Madda, is the USC “Hybrid High” project. In this project, advanced high school students were enrolled in classroom setting where, while they still had a teacher, 90% of their instruction was delivered through means of technology. While the initial thought was that students would show promise in this environment, researchers were shocked to see that these students became credit deficient. After revisal of the program and the incorporation of the teacher as a facilitator of learning, the students reflected positively in their assessments. (No Silver Bullets: Hybrid High Learns a Tough Edtech Lesson - EdSurge News.” Madda argues that there is an irreplaceable connection between students and the instructor that initiates high quality learning. I agree.
While the connection is irreplaceable, more must be done to help mitigate the technological limbo that teachers of my generation will face in the classroom because of the expectation to use technology. In order for this to happen, I believe teachers will need to be equipped with the proper time and funds to in order to learn these programs and technologies properly. Additionally, we must acknowledge that improper use of technology acts as a replacement of the teacher and will cause our students to suffer in our classrooms and work against ineffective uses of technology in our classrooms.
Works Cited
Madda, Mary Jo. “No Silver Bullets: Hybrid High Learns a Tough Edtech Lesson - EdSurge News.” EdSurge, EdSurge, 27 Dec. 2018, www.edsurge.com/news/2014-04-02-no-silver-bullets-hybrid-high-learns-a-tough-edtech-lesson.
Comments