One of the main jobs of an educational technologist (ET) in any setting is to assist in integrating technology. In reality, just about anyone can "integrate technology" into their classroom without the help of an ET. (Having a computer in the class so students can play computer games during free time counts, right?) The ET's real job in the realm of integration is to help teachers use technology in engaging and meaningful ways. Sounds easy enough, but a lot of classroom technology is used to present an old idea in a new way (not very meaningful OR engaging). In order to get to the meaningful and engaging use of technology, ETs have to help teachers transform their teaching strategies to facilitate the best use of the technology available. Not sounding so easy anymore, right? Fear not!
To get teachers headed in the right direction, ETs need to provide the tools (and support) to help teachers ask themselves a key question when they use technology in a lesson or assignment: "Could this task have been completed without the technology I used?" If the answer is yes, chances are their attempt at integration missed the mark.
Imagine this scenario: A grade 5 teacher asks her class to give a report on animal habitats by researching facts on the internet and then presenting them with PowerPoint.
So let's try to evaluate this task on its meaningful integration. Was technology integrated into the lesson? Absolutely. Was it a task that used technology for technology's sake? Possibly. Now consider the key question: Could this task have been completed without technology? I do believe a resounding "YES!" is in order here. This task is no different than the traditional task of sending kids to the library to research facts in books and then create a poster showcasing their findings. In other words, it's a new way to complete an old task.
So how do we fix it? One idea is to use rubrics or checklists to help teachers evaluate their use of technology. One example comes from Bernajean Porter. In her presentations at IT Summit 2010 in Saskatoon, Bernajean led a few discussions that dealt with the meaningful integration of technology in schools. (See the synopsis of her presentations here. "All Technology Uses are NOT Equal" and "Extreme Make-over" are the presentations I refer to in this post.) During Bernajean's presentation, she gave participants a rubric entitled "H.E.A.T.ing UP™ Student Performance Tasks for Transformational Learning". (The rubric itself is copyrighted but I'll give you the gist.)
Each time technology is used in the classroom, the teacher can evaluate how much transformational learning the students were engaged in by circling the objectives they met. For example, under Higher Order Thinking, if the task mentioned above was designed to help students become familiar with internet searches and PowerPoint and the point was not really to learn about habitats, then the lesson would be focused on technological literacy. (This is fine in moderation, by the way!) If the point of the task was to have students research facts and report back about them (ABOUT being the operative word), then the assignment would fit into the adapting technology level. However, if students were required to make meaning of animal habitats by USING the facts they found or, even better, produce information of their own about animal habitats, then we would be looking at transformative learning. With just a quick glance, teachers are able to see how their use of technology measures up. They are also able to consider how to take an existing idea and transform it to create higher learning and more meaningful use of technology for their students.
Of course, transforming the strategies and practices a teacher is accustomed to will take time. Encourage teachers to start small with one or two lessons a year and build from there. Trying to change too much too fast just might have the opposite effect and result in teachers avoiding technology integration all together.
For more discussion and a few examples, check out Jeff Utecht's post on Evaluating Technology Use in the Classroom or Sun Associates webpage.
Wondering how to offer Professional Development to get everyone on the same page? Here's an exploration of the issue that might give you some ideas!
The technology integration hat is a big one, isn't it Carmen? Thanks for the links on "meaningful integration" and evaluation. These are really useful! I'm also passing along your link on professional development to Anne in our class. She's been looking for good material for a paper.
ReplyDeleteOne of the difficult challenges we face is getting users to look through the technology to the learners and the learning. I don't think technology will ever become entirely transparent, but I'm really hopeful that technology (at least, the technologies we have today) are becoming translucent -- common enough that we stop worrying about them and get on with the vocation we have as educators.
By the way, to be a devil's advocate, let me pose a question: If, as with your example, a task can be completed without technology, does it actually mean that the integration missed the mark? Does this suggest that anything that can be accomplished without technology, should not employ it? Does this suggest that technology should only be used when there is no other option? Are there times when we can use technology just because it is one of the paths we have available to us?
ReplyDeleteAh, the devil's advocate! I was hoping to address that in my post actually, but I was already getting kind of windy!
ReplyDeleteI think that at this point, using technology in any form is a step forward. (Even if it means using new means to present an old idea.) For some, that in itself is an awfully big step.
However, like you said in your first post, once we get past the fear stage the focus really should be on the learning. I also did not mean to say that learning can't take place when we use internet searches or PowerPoints, I just meant that the capabilities of learning with technology are far bigger than that.
Some people might not be ready for meaningful uses of technology yet, and that's okay! But once they're ready...I'm ready to make sure they get the most of the time they put into using the technology!
I get that resistance at work...don't use technology just to use technology. I like what you said about having a new way to do an old thing. You know what I was thinking about the other day, imagine if we had to write all of our reserach papers and stuff by actually going to the library. Internet research - a new way of doing an old thing.
ReplyDeleteI have to echo Rick's Devils advocate post. I think that we should move past the "Could this task have been completed without technology?" question. Computers are central to how we live our lives, do our work, and learn and, I think everyone agrees that they are only going to become more prevalent. I don't integrate technology for the sake of technology, I do it because there is almost nothing that my students or I do that does not include technology, so not using it would be just for the sake of not using it.
ReplyDeleteI agreed with Bernajean Porters keynote presentation at the IT Summit, but I think focusing the HEAT on technology integration is a little unfair. I would imagine that just as many projects without technology have as little rigor as those with technology.
When I wrote the post, I wasn't really thinking of people like us who embrace technology and see it's value. I was thinking more of people who hear their administration is coming and throw something together for show day and never use it again. (Not to say that my use of technology couldn't be enhanced to be deeper!)
ReplyDelete