Thursday, September 8, 2011
Technology and 21st Century Skills
Much is made these days of "21st century learners", "21st century skills", and "21st century classrooms". Invariably, technology -- and the use of technology in classrooms by students and teachers -- is an assumed component of these 21st century phenomena. But does technology really make a difference in teaching and learning? Has the use of technology in classrooms led to improved teaching and learning? Is a 21st century education that different from a 20th century education?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
In my opinion, 21st century skills are taught and utilized as technology is the driving force of this era. Similar to the days when farming was the way of the land, we are responsible for teaching our children (future leaders) the skills needed to make a living, compete internationally, and contribute economically to this country. With a 21st century focus on teaching and learning, we are preparing our youth for the way of the land as it is today. We are teaching them transferable skills that are used in almost every profession. By doing so, we are making them career ready by making them technology savvy.
However, the essentials of education (reading, writing, arithmetic) are in essence the same as in the past. While technology has increased and improved the vehicles in which we use to learn this material and utilize it, education at the heart is still the same. In my opinion the emphasis on technology has less influence on what is taught, verses how it is being taught and why it is being taught. I see 21st century skills as a way of improvement. It is my belief that these skills enriches the educational experience, not replaces educational roots.
Dr. Graham stated and I agree with him that “invariably, technology—and the use of technology in classrooms by students and teachers—is an assumed component of [these] 21st century phenomena.”
I read and moved past this statement swiftly before I stopped to really consider the implications of this for students who don’t have access to technology and the impact this has on their ability to be successful in the 21st century if this “invariably” is true. I considered my own experiences in education. I have had the privilege of being at schools with what I perceive as very little access to technology. A possible correlation with this is that in turn, I have also had the privilege of being at schools that have all been very low performing. I’m realizing there are layers of variables involved in why a school is low performing, but could it be that said that one reason why schools are low performing is because they lack technology?
My experience as a teacher in a traditional public school was in a very low performing school in a very poor district. My experiences in charter schools have also involved schools with little technology availability. These factors coupled with the fact that in Special Education, unless the technology is a component of a child’s IEP (FM system, Kurzweil, etc.), special education is usually the last department to get any of the new building’s technology! Aside from Grad School, I’ve never even seen a smartboard!
To prove my earlier assumption, these schools that haven’t had technology are also the same schools just barely meeting their goals – all three schools have been or are currently in school improvement. One school is in year 7 of school improvement and one school was actually shut down and their student population redistributed the year I left.
My conclusion – technology does impact education! I will end with this, I found several articles in my search for data to support one side or the other on this “does technology really impact education argument” and the research mostly agreed that technology in and of itself is nice to have, but it can really only make a difference to the extent that it is used effectively by both the teachers and the students. I would say for schools that can’t access technology, there is definitely a disadvantage. And for those that have it at their disposal, they need to learn how to use it and implement it effectively.
I think that technology does make a difference in the classroom when implemented appropriately. It allows students the opportunity to visualize concepts and content. It allows for self-discovery during the learning process.
I do not believe it has improved teaching and learning across the board. We have pockets of success where teachers have been given on-going professional development to develop technology use in the classroom. In order to ensure teachers know how to incorporate technology and 21st Century Skills we have to equip them with the necessary tools.
I believe that 21st century skills mirror 20th century skills but the mode in which we use these skills have changed drastically. We still do research, apply methods, and report our findings. 21st century skills gives us the opportunity to share our findings [visual and written] with a wide audience thus teaching them in a non-traditional sense.
I view technology and 21st Century Skills in two different ways. To start with, I believe the art of teaching itself is not defined by technology. Good teachers are good teachers with or without it. Students can become productive learners with or without it. What I do believe technology does is adds convenience to the learning experience for both teachers and students. Sometimes the convenience yields positive results when balance is defined. Other times it can become a crutch for students, keeping them from being responsible for their own learning. Students are more willing to use calculators than to memorize their multiplication facts. They certainly would rather utilize google for a research project than to learn how to navigate the library. The key word hear is BALANCE. The learning process should be enhanced by technology and not replaced by it.
The other way I view this issue is that for High School students especially, they need to be able to compete in society. Since technology is a large part of that, we as educators do have some responsibility in teaching and preparing them for a world that is technology heavy. It all comes back to the fact that good teachers make good decisions. I would like to think that the appropriateness of technology ranges in WHAT and HOW MUCH from grades K-12.
When Dr. Graham said in class that he might argue that technology has made very little impact (or maybe no impact?) in teaching and learning, I was pretty taken aback at first. The more I thought about that statement though, the more I realized that it was actually pretty true for me and my students. As a high school history teacher, the only technology in my classroom was an old massive desktop that barely worked well enough to complete the NC Wise attendance and an overhead… which I did use almost daily. As a fifth grade teacher… same thing – 2 huge old desktops that were so decrepit that the kids barely used them, a “listening center” that had CDs of our weekly story… which I typically read to the students anyway, and an overhead that I relied on almost daily. I also had access to a projector, which I did use, but only sparingly as I had to share it with 4 other teachers. Now, as an EC teacher, I have 2 more massive desktops, which, surprise-surprise, work so very poorly that we never use them. The only thing I can say that I’ve had which has likely improved my teaching (and therefore my students’ learning) is access to the internet at school (most days… when the network’s not down). And the internet has been primarily to increase my knowledge… which of course in turn affects my students, but to the extent that it is different than a 20th century education? Probably not.
I’d like to think that if I had had more/better technology in my classrooms I would have been able to bring my students to new and higher levels of learning – but I can’t honestly say I think that would be true. As a teacher with little access to technology I found other ways for my students to experience math, science, language arts, and social studies… and those other ways were typically fairly successful.
So in my opinion, from a technological standpoint, no, a 21st century education is not that different from a 20th century education.
Wow…I find myself agreeing with each post I read. I especially agree with Felicia’s comments about teachers being good teachers with or without technology, and her comment about needing to prepare students to compete in society. She is so right!!!
I can speak to the difference between teaching in the 21st century compared to the 20th century. The way I teach today is far different from the way I taught 20 years ago. Before the advent of the Internet, students had to remember much more. We used to teach students to memorize most information, but now we teach them to find and analyze information. In teaching reading, we used to make students read a story to remember the details; now we teach them to read to comprehend, and allow them to use the text while answering questions. Memorizing the story is not necessary, understanding it is.
I believe the advances in technology have been the catalyst for this shift. Students are used to a world where they (or their teachers) can instantly find information. Even if they do not have access to the technology, they expect the teachers to. (I have not worked in an impoverished area, but I have had many students with no home computer; even they expect the teacher to have access to technology.) At first it seems we are teaching them to be lazy, but when I truly look at what we are doing, we are teaching them to use the tools they have available and to THINK about the results (at whatever age appropriate level that might be).
We have not done away with the basics, however. We still teach students basic skills of reading and math. The difference is in the application of these skills. There are many ways in which teaching is the same, and probably has been for several centuries.
So, is a 21st century education different? Yes. Has it led to improved teaching/learning? That depends on your definition of “improved.” I would say yes, basing my answer on “improved” being an education that matches the society in which the students live.
Going back to what Felicia said, “Good teachers are good teachers with or without it”—I believe good teachers use whatever tools available to them to best reach their students. Technology is just one of those tools.
Looking at NCDPI's "Framework for 21st century learning," very little is actually focused on technology in the classroom. As we know, we are preparing students to use technology that hasn't been invented yet. Instead, the focus of the 21st century framework is instruction in adaptability, innovation, health, financial literacy, global citizenship, etc. Technology in and of itself is not a boon to education. I'm sticking with my carpenter/tool analogy: a good carpenter can make great use of great tools, and a poor carpenter will end up with few, and stumpy, fingers.
That being said, 21st century education better to be different from 20th century education because we are preparing our kids for a totally different world. We are becoming a global community that is experiencing exponential growth and change. Much of this growth is technological and when possible, that technology should be part of the instruction. However, technology is not the means to the end.
Looks like I get to bring up Finland again! Finnish schools have almost no technology in their classrooms, yet their students are among the highest achieving in the world. Do these teachers need technology to effectively teach? Nope! BUT (and this is a big), their students almost without exception have access to a plethora of technological devices the minute they walk out the school building. That is just simply not true in US schools. We do not need technology to teach our kids; sure it is really fun to be able to use Google earth on a whim to show kids the topography of a country we're learning about, but it isn't necessary, and it doesn't significantly add to the quality of their education. On the other hand, CTE classes, where students actually learn technology skills such as typing, how to use excel spreadsheets, etc. are important, particularly for those students who do not have access to those resources or knowledge bases at home. Many jobs require basic computer skills, therefore incorporating those skills into the child's education is an important role for the school. Using my Smart board, on the other hand, that's just for fun and to give the kids an excuse to get out of their seats (which I could also do with a piece of paper taped to the wall...).
Technology is merely the new platform upon which we are attempting to deliver education. For example, posting on this blog is just a newer version of turning in a written reflection to you, albeit the blog allows for the “paper pile” to be public. So the bigger question here is not whether or not technology is really making a difference in education, but rather why education is not changing. We have taken technology, which has the power and capability to transform learning, and forced it to conform to the “old ways” of teaching and learning. So to answer your first question, no, technology has not made a substantial difference in teaching and learning…yet.
As the Christensen article on Transforming Schools discussed, technology has not fundamentally transformed the way learning is accomplished or how the classroom operates. However, given the ability of computers to differentiate instruction, creating a customized learning portfolio for all students, it seems as if it is only a matter of time before technology makes the impact that it’s been promising to make for the past decade. 21st century education will begin to look different from previous centuries when we stop attempting to cram the innovation known as technology into our current system. After undergoing a disruption innovation, Technology will become the new institution that the old system of education has to adapt too, hence changing it’s flawed ways.
I think that technology is a good camouflage for poor teaching, a nice aid for decent teaching, but not necessary for successful teaching and learning. In my experiences, technology has been used as a crutch and teachers have gotten away from teaching the basics and using their skills to create interactive and engaging lessons. Many argue that with the short attention spans that the students are bringing into the classroom, technology is needed to keep them engaged. I disagree.
While teaching in Japan, which is regarded as one of the more successful countries in preparing students for future jobs, I never once saw a projector, computer, or CPS system in a classroom. Yes, they had a computer lab, and the teachers had access to these technology materials but they were not needed to create a successful learning environment. The teachers taught the students how to learn and use their resources, which I think prepares the students to better adjust to any situation they could encounter after leaving the school.
As I say all these drawbacks to technology, I do agree with Xavier. If technology is implemented appropriately, it does allow the opportunity for students to visualize concepts and truly see education instead of just reading about it. I think technology is great for visual learning opportunities for students with limited resources at home.Technology allows for visual and some interactive learning opportunities but it is not always experiential. Textbooks are updated every four or five years, so technology gives teachers a current selection to choose from. Using technology as an extension to the lesson effectively does bring the world into the classroom for students.
The bottom line is we need to teach our students to be learners and to adapt to their surroundings through basic skills in order to be successful. With jobs rapidly changing, there is no way that we can teach them to be 100% competent in and prepared for their chosen fields, but if we teach them to be active learners and problem solvers that are able to adjust to their surroundings, we can create successful citizens.
I hope I can add a fresh perspective, but the reality is I agree with and share the same views as the other posts. Two thoughts came to mind: 1. Do we need to discern the different degrees of technology available? 2. How do you define necessity? Technology may be a component of the 21st century learner, but it is not an equal component in all schools. School A may be equipped with smart boards and iPads in each classroom whereas school B may not have one operating computer in the classroom. Then, what should be the baseline amount of technology present for each student in each school? If technology is not present at home then should a school be the leading source of resources or public libraries? This question leads nicely to the point of necessity. If resources are available in different environments, then maybe schools should focus on improving teaching, so that each student has an equitable experience whether they attend school A or B. The way of the future is through technology, but there are some serious questions and hurdles to overcome to make it available for everyone.
In an effort to answer the question of does technology make a difference in teaching and learning, I would have to respond with a resounding YES. On the contrary I don’t believe that technology or the adoption of 21st century skills has greatly improved learning and teaching. I have seen first hand the use of technology in my school and I was the catalyst for getting SMART Boards, document cameras and iPads and I can attest that the quality of the instruction within our walls has not increased. Teachers are for the most part doing the same things they always have they are just using a different avenue of instructional delivery. While I am not surprised by this lack of improvement I am a little disappointed.
Even though we introduce new devices into the classroom that claim to increase student interaction and engagement, the technology is only as good as the educator incorporating and is limited by the individuals’ knowledge and commitment to its use. I am not sure that technology will ever greatly improve education. While it may help to make education for accessible, cost effective and uniform from school to school and district to district all of these things in my opinion will not increase the quality of education or help to close the ever-present achievement gap.
I am also equally divided on “21st Century Learners and Skills”. I am in charge of staff development within my building and as a result have had the opportunity to hear from other school and district leaders on how they define “21st Century Skills” and I have been frustrated that every individual person that I speak with has an individual and vastly different definition of 21st Century Learners and the 21st Century Classroom. I think that we all feel that we know what the 21st Century Classroom should look like and what skills children need to be successful in the 21st century, we just have difficulty narrowing those skills down to objectives that all children can and should be proficient in. I always remind my self of a simple statement made by Yogi Berra “If you don’t know where you are going, you are going to end up some place else”. I feel that we have no idea what we desire to be our end result and as a result are headed in a direction that will most likely leave us no better off.
At some point the term “21st Century Skills” became synonymous with “Computer skills.” When we look at the many definitions of 21st Century Skills, they don’t actually include technology. For example, Julie Sturgeon in her article 21st Century Skills identifies the “need to apply creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, communication, and collaboration skills to these tasks.” I believe most teachers see the value in instilling these qualities in their students. The problem is, the students are still tested on their knowledge, on how much content we can shove in their heads in a year. It is a challenge to meet the expectations of creating a 21st Century Learner while preparing the students for a decidedly un-21st Century test.
I think technology became mixed up in the discussion, because, at the same time, the “digital natives” were entering our schools. They didn’t know a world that didn’t contain computers, cell phones, Google, etc. Educational leaders knew that, in order to engage these students, we needed to create an instructional world that contained the tools the digital natives were used to using. I agree with Xavier that technology can be a good tool in the classroom, when it is used correctly. If it is just used to type up a paper instead of writing it- we have not infused any of the 21st Century skills into it. If it is used to communicate with and learn from another student across the world, we have infused 21st Century skills into it.
In the end, it comes down to quality teaching. A quality teacher is going to figure out a way to instill 21st Century Skills in her students while at the same time preparing them for the test, and she is going to be able to use technology in a way that engages her students in authentic learning experiences. In that way, 21st century teaching is not that much different than 20th century teaching- it is still about quality instruction.
Honestly, I must admit that although I have heard the buzz words, 21st Century Learning, thrown all around for the past few years. I was really unsure what it meant. That is why I wanted to take my time and read every article before I even attempted to respond to this blog. After reading all of the articles I gather from them all, especially the Dan Willingham article (Education for the 21st Century: Balancing Content Knowledge with Skills ) that 21st century learning means that we are teaching students to be critical and creative thinkers who are able to work in teams or individually to problem solve and generate new ideas (I was trying to keep it simple, but that seemed like a mouthful). I also concluded, after reading these articles, that they would use more technology to do all of this. Now that I have a better understanding of 21st Century Learning, I guess I can respond to the questions.
I am convinced that there are pros and cons to everything; therefore I think that there are benefits to using technology in the classrooms, but is it necessary, no. Educators can simulate many situations and develop numerous ideas that can help improve a students ability to problem solve and become critical thinkers without technology. In fact, I can remember being asked did I have these skills when I graduated high school in 1993 and college in 1997. In that aspect, 21st century education is not any different than 20th century. Call me an idealist, but I think that most teachers then and now want to educate students on how to be productive citizens and that they have always tried to produce students that possess all of these 21st Century skills. To me, technology is a tool that can be used to enhance education. If we are not using it as an enhancement then it becomes useless or its effectiveness is minimized. I would apply this same theory (enhancing learning) to teacher effectiveness. Some teachers use technology to enhance their students’ learning. They creatively think of ways to integrate technology into the classroom, while others see it as a nuisance or they are scared of it so they do something like throw in a PowerPoint or use the LCD projector and call it technology (I am guilty).
So, let me recap to make sure everyone understands my answers to these questions.
1. Technology can make a difference if used effectively, but the way most schools use it now, I would say, no it is not making much difference.
2. Again, I think it has lead to some innovative thinking for some teachers, but for many it is just one more thing that they have to do. I think there is a lot of potential for the use of technology in the classroom. As a side note, I would like to say that I don’t think computers or any technology should replace humans in the classroom.
3. The only difference between 21st Century and 20th Century Education is different technology. I think the basic principles that surround 21st Century Education are not any different than the outcome we wanted during the 20th Century.
This was an interesting post. I particularly enjoyed Patty's comments about the way she teaches over the last 20 years. What a wealth of experience!
I agree with Felecia, good teaching is good teaching. I tend to believe that technology makes the learning more exciting, relevant, and convenient at times. It creates opportunities for teachers to expose students to a wide array of things without ever leaving their classrooms. On the other hand, I have sat through a ton of interviews where teachers equate 21st Century technology use in their classrooms to Smartboards and Internet searches. In terms of technology improving teaching and learning, I believe that the technology is only as good as the person who is using it. I think students can answer this question much better than we can. They seem to adapt to new Technology so much easier and with more depth than adults. It would be trully amazing to allow the students to teach us a thing or two about the use of technology.
I think technology has made many of the logistics of teaching (e.g. attendance, data collection and storage, planning) a whole lot easier, but it doesn't guarantee a "21st century education." I saw a lot of people who had smartboards in their classrooms who used the application to simply put up word documents that could have just as easily been transparencies. And an extra computer in the back of a classroom is one of the most laughable attempts to provide students access to technology.
Christiansen and Horne focus on the disruptive characteristics of technology in education, specifically that technology based comprehensive educational alternatives are providing a unique service to a population not being served by traditional schools. This is a valid point, but I think technology also plays a role in enhancing existing modes of instruction. The interactivity Shirky says today's children rightfully expect is something that technology can provide--but not on its own.
We're not at the point where students can simply sit down at a learning console and get a meaningful education passively. The Walt Whitman lesson I looked at on K12's website was pathetic, and as I read it, I realized that what I was missing was some interaction with the material. I read generalizations about Walt Whitman's beliefs and syntax and imagery, but it was like something out of a textbook, except it was shorter and on a computer. A kid sitting at a computer and earnestly looking up a variety of media to learn about Walt Whitman would have engaged in a much more meaningful way. A computer and a passive student cannot make that happen on their own, no matter how well aligned with district standards the material may be.
Perhaps, I'm a cynic, but 21st century skills is a coin phrase. While it sounds good, it is no different from 20th century skills. Granted, there are certain skills that are different from 21st century skills than 20th century skills. However, I think educators intentions are the same. They want students to be prepared to the best of their ability, no matter the time frame.
I am a big advocate for technolgy. When used appropriately and effectively, it can greatly enhance a student's educational experience. However, too often teachers use it as a prop (i.e data projector, document cam, smart board). There are also great programs out there to enhance reading and math skills. Nonetheless, sticking kids in front of the computer can be just as ineffective as sticking kids in a classroom while they inattentively listen to a teacher lecter for 45 min. Effective instruction that incorporates technology is important. However, too often, teachers don't have the time or resources to learn how to use them. There is always something new coming out. Alot of times educators get on the bandwagon of the newest educational fad, often times missing the big picture: how can I use this resource to effectively instruct this child. Yes, it is important to spark a child's interest, and capture a child's attention, but it is equally important to provide them with something that challenges them, allows them to relate to prior knowledge, and causes them to think
Oftentimes in education we tend to aim at devaluing solitary ideas and reforms because they don't fix everything. Whether it be testing and accountability or Common Core standards, there is no one unified and sweeping solution to improving education that will satisfy or benefit all stakeholders.
One thing that all educators can agree on, however, is that priority should be placed on preparing our students for the future, whatever that may be. I believe that "21st Century skills" are a part of this preparation, even though this catch-phrase is unnecessarily used at times to validate controversial policies and decisions. The truth of the matter, however, is that by and large our students are learning 21st century skills nearly 24 hours a day. Today, kids as young as middle school (and sometimes earlier) have smart phones that can do things our personal computers couldn't do ten years ago. They also express themselves through social media and upload videos into youtube. In my opinion, many of the 21st century skills we're asked to impart on our young people they already have: collaboration, real-world perspective, problem solving, varied mediums of communication.
Our job as educators, then, is to bridge the skills they already have with the content we're called to provide--which doesn't always require technology. However, when used effectively, technology can be a wonderful avenue to engage our students in the learning process and provide them with an alternative to the methods they've previously been exposed to.
I've absolutely seen it make a difference in my teaching, as I've become better and more efficient at formatively assessing students, while improving at meeting the different needs of students with varied learning styles. I've also witnessed students far surpass expected growth because they bought into a different way of learning via technology and interactive software. Is this happening in every classroom and with every student? Absolutely not--technology can either be a great help or an even larger distraction.
So, I'm not sure that a 20th century education is currently any different than a 21st century education. Is there really a difference? Don't we still teach Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2? Don't we still read the American classics? Have we detonated the Periodic table and started over? Did the South win the Civil War, after all?
I ask these questions because I think what gets lost in this debate is whether the content is any diferent. It isn't. Not to mention, does technology really change the bigger picture of these courses and their topics?
Ultimately, the content--the things we want them to learn--has largely remained unchanged. Our school structure also hasn't changed, we still have a fixed number of classes a day for a fixed number of minutes where every class is a pre-requisite for the next one.
So, while "21st Century Skills" sounds good and means well, and in a number of cases really does expose students to new skills and possibilities, I think that it misses the mark in that it doesn't force public education to pepare our students for their future, whatever it may be.
I believe that technology can enhance teaching and learning. But I do not believe that it is a must for teachers to teach and children to learn. It gives teachers a different approach to teaching skills and concepts. It allows teachers to differentiate even more to meet the needs of the students. Technology helps to keep students engaged in the classroom. There are teachers that I know who are excellent and rarely if ever use technology to teach their students. They are able to keep students engaged and excited about learning without the use of devices such as SMART boards. When the growth of students in their classes is compared to others, they do just as well if not better. I am of the opinion that we should teach students the old fashioned way first and then use technology to expand their learning. Technological devices should be used as tools, something to enhance what they already know how to do.
I will admit that I was very excited to have a SMART board installed in my classroom last year. My students were excited as well. I immediately began using it. It kept me from having to make copies of overheads and from having to remember which file cabinet or drawer I put them in. I just plugged in my flash drive and everything I needed was a click away. We played games that reviewed skills and concepts they were learning. But I didn’t start doing these interactive things just because I got a SMART board, I was doing them all along. The SMART board just made it easier.
There are some cases in which technology has improved teaching and learning. I think about cases in special education where students need innovative devices to help them learn. They use technology to be able to communicate with teachers and classmates. Without the use of the assistive devices, their learning may have been more limited. I believe in those situations, you would see significant student growth due to the use of technology. I am also reminded of the article by Christensen and Horn that talked about the need for computer-based courses for students wanting to take AP courses. Using technology in this way improves student learning. Students have already learned the basics and are ready to take their learning even further. In this case I do believe that technology is important, especially if there are no teachers with the ability to teach the AP courses.
I don’t believe that the core of education has changed from the 20th to the 21st century. All of the basic skills and concepts still have to be learned. No matter what year or century, 2 + 2 will still equal 4. I just think that because of our rapid advances in technology, there are additional things that children have to learn so that we, America, can keep up with the rest of the world.
How technology changes learning or teaching depends on the teaching using the technology. Teachers who had a solid fundamental understanding of a particular type of technology are really good at seeing how it could be implemented into what they were teaching. However, some teachers feel pressure to use technology in the classroom and are not equipped to use it. They were using technology to appease PLTs, administration, or other parts of the school. In this instance they could have been more effective had they steered clear of technology.
Based on the recent increase in spending on technology in school and the stagnant education gains seen for the past twenty years it is safe to say that technology has not led to improved teaching or learning. Just like with a lot of recent innovations in education there are certain examples of success, but also evidence of no significant improvement. Reading articles we see both the areas where technology is successful and where it is wasteful.
The specific standards being taught in the 21st century are not that different from the standards from the 20th century. From this point of view we can say that the education from the two different centuries is virtually the same. Now the ways in which the standards are taught have changed. So sticking with the carpenter theme of Rob, let’s say the standards are represented by a birdhouse and the equipment used to make the birdhouse is represented by a hammer in the 20th century and a laser saw in the 21st century. 20th and 21st century students are stilling ending up with a birdhouse, but in building the birdhouse in the 21st century they now know how to use a laser saw.
I agree with Felicia. The students of good teachers learn despite whether the teacher has a SMART board or not. However, we are increasingly utilizing technology to not only access information, but there is already so much information that only exists in an "e-version". Not only are we at a point where traditional delivery methods are becoming obsolete, but there is already a wealth of knowledge that is completely inaccessible to those who lack the tools or skills that are typically associated with "21 Century Learning".
We know that today's youth, think, learn, socialize, and communicate in totally different ways than we did growing up. In fact, they are born and live in a digital world that is constantly changing.
With that said, I do believe that technology can enhance teaching and learning in the classroom. However, it has not enhanced teaching and learning because our current education system has not yet fully embraced ways to teach and educate the digital generation.
The use of technology in the classroom has lots of potential to allow students richer access to various types of information and in multiple ways. It can bring to life abstract concepts. In addition, technology can offer flexibility on the teacher's part.
The challenge is how do we measure the success of technology in learning? Currently, technology use has relied on individual teachers who give up their own time to learn its function, but its use is not necessarily expanded.
Post a Comment