“If we’re not seeing what technology blended into curriculum & instruction,” shared a colleague one afternoon, “if it’s not integral to the success of a lesson or learning activity, then technology is just so much fluff.”
“Well, if we must be fluff, then let’s be the best fluff out there!” I regret that this was not a fulfilling conversation for either party. When we talk of revolutionizing schools, reforming them, fundamentally transforming them, I’m left wondering what we’re really saying.
As I’ve transitioned from my role as a Director of Instructional Technology to Technology Operations, I feel less pressure to advocate the “edtech perspective” which is undervalued in schools today. Simply, who the heck wants to keep evangelizing a perspective that has made such poor inroads into Curriculum & Instruction Departments in schools? Now, my focus is less that of preacher and more of Maytag repairman with a good product to support…fortunately, no technology seems to be as reliable as the Maytag washer featured in commercials!
I’m often reminded of the plight of Instructional Technologists when I reflect on the work of C.S. Lewis, who cites G.K. Chesterton. I’ve adapted the original quote:
Instructional Technology has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.
I get a laugh every time. I also get a laugh when I read quotes about revolution (including my own):
Chromebooks are attractive for schools…but why? What’s the motivation for taking a hard look at Chromebooks?
“Humans respond to three motivations: moral, social and economic. The measure of character is which you respond to most.” – Joseph Grenny
Character may matter little to schools these days…choosing your technology because of cost makes sense. The problem is, most school leaders are NOT choosing cost. If that were the case, we’d all be using Linux and figure out a way to 1) Make management work; 2) Twist the arm of State Education Agencies and Pearson to support dominant technologies.
We’d forget about motivators like…
- High stakes testing from Pearson that requires a proprietary operating system
- iStation (in Texas)
- Think Through Math (in Texas)
- A wide variety of software that only runs on Windows, and many times, on Mac
More powerful than Chris Lehmann’s embrace of Chromebooks for SLA (Video | Article | Rebuttal) is this story Del Valle ISD English teacher shared…this is the motivation I can get behind, although cost is a powerful motivator:
Source: Students Raise Money for New Computers in Del Valle ISD, Texas
Who couldn’t blame students for wanting computers they could type on?
My criteria depend on the following, for which I am unapologetic:
- Does the technology do what we need it to? If the need is for drill-n-practice, then it would be foolish to buy technology for PBL, multimedia creation, etc. After all, tech supports the dominant culture in schools. Unfortunately, mixing super advanced technology into the mix does not “transform” people. That takes crucial conversations and confrontations.
- Once we’ve determined what technology is needed, what’s the least expensive equipment to get the job done? If we’re going to be putting kids on electronic tutorials, then why buy top of the line laptops that cost $1300? Let’s spend $620 (that’s an actual quote for Win7 machine, BTW) or less to get an i3, 4gigs RAM, 500gig hard drive desktop that will get it done.
- Where will this equipment be placed? If placement is in a lab, then we should be buying desktops, not laptops, chromebooks and iPads that have to be managed in a cart (expensive). I can’t tell you how many times I’ve walked into situations where equipment less durable than a desktop has been destroyed.
- 2 iPads for document cameras, video editing, digital cameras
- 2-5 desktop computers for whatever
- 5 Chromebooks
Make Donations via PayPal below: