The Power of Computers

Changing the Way Teachers Engage Students

byHeather Schilling

EDTEC 670 – Dr. Mullen22 July 2005

Background IssuesSchools acknowledge importance of computers in classrooms – nearly 100% have Internet accessOnly a handful of educators fully integrate computers Most use computers as glorified typewriters (Rod Paige, Jan 2005)Megachanges are occurring all around, but “the process of teaching has not changed substantially over the past 100 years” (Ferguson)

Obstacles to Full Integration

TimeLack of dialogue about learning processes – computers can open this dialogueNo Child Left Behind – accountability – everything must be scientifically researched – difficulty in distinguishing impact of computers on student learningRod Paige – “consulted 200,000 children” to create the National Education Technology Plan

Key Elements Shaping Computer Use

International Society for Technology in Education has created National Educational Technology StandardsCreate important guidelines, profiles, and standards for technologically prepared teachers and studentsMajor implications for teacher prep programs

The FocusSociety sees the importance of computersMajor focus must be on the teaching philosophy of educatorsLook to Constructivism -

Atticus High School Revisited

Rural high school of 548 students in grades 9 –12Large amount of money spent on computersSpecific technology plan in placeOnly a small handful use computers in the fullest extent How can Atticus encourage more of its teachers to approach teaching like Mr. Clark?

Seymour PapertThe Children’s Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer (1993)Avoids term constructivism – hasn’t been successful in transforming educationUses term constructionism and matheticsConstructionism – connotation of ‘construction set’Mathetics – from Greek family of “to learn” – represents the essence of learning

Papert’s CriticismTraditional, hierarchical schools smother teacher creativity and enthusiasmWe have failed to truly transform the paradigm of how we approach learning

Teacher Preparation Programs

Oswego State University – New YorkGoals 2000 Preservice Tehcnology Infusion ProjectIntegration of technology into teacher prep program- collaboration between public school teachers, college professors, and future teachersBetween 1st and 2nd years – instructional methods of technology rose from 15.9% to 68.9 %

What we learn from Oswego

Preservice teachers want more technology infusionTeacher educators and content methods teachers must model thisPreservice teachers transformed their view of their role as teachers – from dispenser to facilitator

Supporting Veteran Teachers

Provide adequate trainingTeachers must be allowed to learn and play with the technology – at least 35-50 hours before it becomes

Paradigm shiftPapert (1993) says “School does not have in its institutional mind that teachers have a creative role” (p. 70)That is untrue – examples from Papert’s writing and Atticus High SchoolMove away from hierarchical model of schools

Supporting Veteran Teachers continued…

Allow small groups of teachers to collaborate and create their own learning environment within a school – “small school”

Opportunities to discuss and collaborate – develop the sense that taking “instructional risks and trying some alternative ways of instruction” is acceptable and encouraged (Goldman and others, 1999, p. 33)

ConclusionsComputers have the possibility to transform how we teach and how we learnWe must step away from the current paradigm that binds us We must embrace a constructivist or constructionist approach to teachingTeacher prep programs and administration is key in helping promote this philosophy of teachingStandardized testing is here – move on!