Blog Posting: Information and Technology Literacy

Here is the blog post that I presented on last week.

-Dara

On the topic of technology and education, there are two areas of focus:
1. Technology used by you to demonstrate or illustrate something for your students, and
2. Technology used by your students for their own self-directed instruction

1. I won’t delve too deeply into the first topic, simply because it is mostly common knowledge. Digital projectors, movie clips shown to the class, demonstrations on a computer screen, music used as part of a lesson, and even something as simple as having a typed assignment rather than a handwritten one all obviously have a tremendous impact in the classroom. Textbooks often come with demonstration software (especially math and science), and even if your particular textbook didn’t, other publishers’ books may. (This weekend, I picked up 4 statistics textbooks at a used book sale, all of which came with software.) This, coupled with the ample Java applets, pictures, media clips, etc. available by simply Googling whatever it is you’re teaching, takes care of the visual. (If your school has youtube and Google videos blocked, save the entire webpage to your hard drive while you’re at home and then demonstrate with the saved copy.)

2. The second topic is much broader, and much more controversial. It can again be divided into two subcategories:
A. hardware, and
B. software

A. Hardware, including calculators, computers, timers, cameras, etc. are obviously useful, but their long-term practicality has sparked a lot of debate. A constant concern for math teachers is if having calculators available to all students, all the time discourages mental math, and students may find themselves reaching for their calculator to perform simple calculations that they should to be able to do in their head. Another concern is that the calculator (or other technology) is perceived as giving the “right” answer, even though may be far from the case, and thus the critical evaluation of answers is bypassed. Finally, a calculator may hide process and as a result a student may not be aware of it (or may give it a lower priority to the eventual result). A 1986 review of previous studies by Hembree and Dessart (JRME, March 1986, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 83-99) concluded “across all grade and ability levels, students using calculators possess a better attitude toward mathematics and an especially better self-concept in mathematics than students not using calculators”. While the age of the review could call into question the results, and studies such as one on the effects of calculator use on tests of mathematical reasoning (Bridgeman, Harvey, and Braswell, JEM, Winter 1995, Vol. 32, No. 4 pp. 323-340) have found the benefits of calculator use on standardized tests highly variable, I believe both critiques are missing a very key point: technology puts power (quite literally) in the hands of the students. I might lead and demonstrate, but they are the ones computing the results. While a demystification of hardware is essential in ensuring an overall positive affect, and hardware cannot be used without students first having an understanding of process and an ability to predict and evaluate answers on their own, the technology is empowering and, in my opinion, overwhelmingly successful. After all, our students know how to send a text message, download a ringtone, upload to MySpace, and get around a firewall; learning to use a graphing calculator to do more than just add and subtract is not at all out of their reach (and from watching my classes, they love exploring its functions and finding features on their own).

B. The field of educational software is much more extensive, and controversial, than I had imagined. Without trying to be too subject-specific (because I’ve largely focused on math so far!), there are seemingly countless software programs touting improved conceptualization, increased student interest, higher student engagement levels, differentiation and customization tailored to individual student needs, and in general an absolute indispensability to the learning process. With this apparent wealth in resources also come reviews of the software (http://www.educational-software-directory.net/reviews.html provides a guide to online reviews of educational software).
However, a recent Department of Education Study (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040402715.html?hpid=topnews) has not only doubted the overall effectiveness of educational software in raising test scores, but also questioned the legality of some major software purchases. The study cited the ineffectiveness of software in some schools to be a result of lack of teacher training, as some instructors were using it as a replacement for rather than a supplement to instruction. As a matter of personal opinion, I believe that software is secondary to hardware. If a student knows that a computer can help them reduce data, whether or not they use Excel or the software program that came with the physics equipment is secondary. As far as the games-as-instruction method goes, a lot of the software that I have seen does not link the knowledge with its delivery method. After all, shooting at spaceships while learning to type is one thing, but shooting at spaceships when you get the correct solution to a question on standard deviation is definitely another. There should not be a disconnect between process and result. In fact, I feel that the major benefit of educational software is not the program itself but the fact that it’s encouraging students to use the computer in the first place. The goal of technology in general should be at least in part the technological empowerment of the student.