What
is the Key to Effective Technology Integration for My Classroom?
This
is the question which our teachers must answer effectively today
and as with most fuzzy, or ill-formed questions, its answer
lies at least in part on the ability of the individual to accurately
ascertain what learning tasks are at hand, and judge how these
learning tasks are best addressed in terms of known teaching
methods and tools.
Becoming
an Effective Judge of Methods and Tools
One
of the hardest tasks faced by any educator is the ability to
ascertain what teaching strategy
should be used to meet a particular learning objective. In recent
years this process has become much more complicated as the potential
toolset of the teacher has expanded beyond any normal human's
ability to comprehend in its entirety. Thus, the modern teacher
must determine not only the appropriate methodology to meet
their objectives, but the most effective and efficient tools
which that methodology must incorporate to maximize it's effectiveness.
Just as it is probably not wise to use a constructivist approach
to teach someone to throw a hand grenade, it is probably not
wise to use a spreadsheet to teach spelling drill, or to use
a drill and practice program to train teachers how to reach
a higher order judgment objective like when to use technology
in their classroom. Instead, what may be called for is the training
of our teachers to the highest possible level of judgment in
teaching strategies to meet learning objectives and to teach
them which tools best support different strategies.
Judging
Methods
Judging
Tools
There
are many ways of judging appropriate teaching methods for various
objectives but in my experience I have found it very productive
to primarily focus on the learning objective being sought and
the characteristics of my learners as the primary determinants
as to how I teach. I start with the learning objective,and ask
myself if is it clearly descriminant, or is it a fuzzy question
with no universally accepted rules for "correct" versus
"incorrect" responses. It has been my answer that
the more descriminant the objective (example: demonstrate knowledge
of addition) the lower the order of thinking required (in terms
of Bloom's or other taxonomies) and the more effective, and
perhaps efficient a directed instruction approach will be. As
the objective increases in complexity (for example: use available
data to determine if our country's energy policy will be sufficient
to gaurantee adequate energy resources through the year 2050)
the higher the order of thinking required and the more constructivist
the methodology required to effect a satisfactory learning outcome.
It is also very important to consider the qualities of the learner
when examining a teaching strategy, I believe that at a minimum,
the instructor should examine the learner in relation to the
objective from the perspective of the following three domains:
·
Cognitive: What does the student know? (Blooms's Cognitive)
· Performance/Skill: What can the student do?
· Affective: What does the student care about?(Bloom's
Affective)
Again,
in evaluating the student group, it is prudent to choose an
assessment methodology appropriate to task complexity with the
general trend being to move from a criterion of normed based
origin toward a more authentic form of assessment as objective
complexity increases.
One
CANNOT effectively judge technology tools until one can effectively
judge methods, for the tool is either appropriate or not dependent
upon the context it is used. The tool is at its most effective
when it is invisible in the flow of instruction. In other
words, the tool is best used when it is blatently obvious
that it assists the pedagological process in a unique way
which could not be as effectively or effeciently achieved
without the tool and that it does so in a manner which justifies
its cost. In order to be an effective judge of a technology
tool's viability in a given context, the teacher must be a
master of the content to be taught, the tool to be used, and
the fundamental methodologies of how to best teach that content
to different audiences before they can tell if the tool will
be of use in that process. For example, a teacher might use
a program like Math Blaster to make the drill and practice
elements of lower order math instruction more motivating (affective
domain) to her students, but she must also be aware that the
program by its very nature is next to useless in directly
assisting those students in dealing with higher order fuzzy
problems. As drill and practice could be accomplished by pencil
and paper, tthe fundamental question for evaluating the use
of the MathBlaster program would be the net gain of knowledge
acquisiton yielded by increased motivation. This may or may
not be significant based upon the environment. The same would
be the case for the high school government teacher who wants
her students to utilize the statistical plug-ins in Microsoft
Excel in small groups to formulate projections regarding the
contry's energy situation and formulate a judgement as to
if our energy plan is effective or not. This higher-order
learning task, while very motivating, constructive, and productive
assumes a great deal of capability on the student's part that
must be there if the lesson is to be successful.
ISTE
Teacher Standards
Building
on the NETS for Students, the ISTE NETS for Teachers (NETS•T),
which focus on preservice teacher education, define the fundamental
concepts, knowledge, skills, and attitudes for applying technology
in educational settings. All candidates seeking certification
or endorsements in teacher preparation should meet these educational
technology standards. Meet Your Standards !!!
ISTE
Student Standards
The
technology foundation standards for students are divided into six
broad categories. Standards within each category are to be
introduced, reinforced, and mastered by students. These categories
provide a framework for linking performance indicators within the
Profiles for Technology Literate Students to the standards. You can
use these standards and profiles as guidelines for planning
technology-based activities in which students achieve success in
learning, communication, and life skills.
Technology
Horizons in Education (T.H.E. Journal) is free for educators and has
some great information on current trends in the area of technology
integration.
The
Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education's Digital
Library is a valuable online resource of peer-reviewed and published
international journal articles and proceedings papers on the latest
research, developments, and applications related to all aspects of
Educational Technology and E-Learning. SOME current articles are
available for free download off of the AACE
site.
