Blog #1 EDLT 574 FA10 Scarbrough
I have found the first section of the text by Picciano (2011) to be interesting and extremely relevant to my present role as faculty at NMSU. The layout is logical as it moves from introduction to planning and then applies both to learning with an emphasis on fairness and accessibility. Although the introductory section speaks primarily of early education (primary and secondary school), I have found that the same principles apply not only to undergraduate education where I teach, but also graduate education where I am still a student. The key point that I gained from Chapter 1 of Picciano (2011) was the stress placed on the need for systematic planning and organization in order to achieve the most effective use or ‘bang for the buck’ concerning technology.
The second section outlined the concepts behind some basic steps to be undertaken by anyone involved with or seeking to incorporate technology into the educational environment. The guiding framework recognized the influence that social and behavioral factors can have on learning outcomes, and emphasizes the need of the planner not only to keep these in mind, but also the same factors as they involve faculty and administrative systems. It was particularly interesting to note the sort of ‘reverse engineering’ that was used; in many of the examples, the author started with the outcomes and goals and then worked backwards in order to facilitate planning. I have commonly use this practice myself when designing a new course or curriculum; start with where we want the students to end up (what should they know? What should they be able to do? What are common barriers to achieving the goals?) and then find the materials and learning experiences that will best help to meet the objectives. An excellent example of using technology to ‘teach the teacher’ is found at the following wiki link: http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Instructional_design_model. Though it may not seem like it to students, designing a good course is a lot of work and takes a lot of thought and energy if it is to be maximally successful.
The central point from the third section (chapter three) concerned what has come to be known as the ‘digital divide’, in which disparities in access to technology have presented significant obstacles to be overcome. What good is the very best technology if students can’t access it, or faculty don’t understand how it might best be utilized? Attempts to bridge the gaps have elicited the development of websites such as http://www.digitaldivide.net/, which brings together theorists, activists, educators, and other concerned parties – all seeking to reduce or eliminate disparities in technological access and implementation.
An underlying theme throughout all three chapters is the idea and belief that the end goal should be improving education and learning, and not simply to focus on the technology itself. Sometimes even the ‘old technology’ (and I’m thinking of blackboard and chalk here) can make the most significant impact. The challenge then becomes one of bridging between old technology (blackboards) and the new (social networking websites); there are features common to both that can help those of us instructors schooled in the ‘old ways’ to embrace the newer technologies as they emerge.
Reference
Picciano, A.G. (2011). Educational leadership and planning for technology, 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Thanks John
ReplyDeleteFor me critical thinking is more than just what we think or define. I say this as my personal opinion because human’s thinking is personal and individual, meaning that we could all the same thing and interpret it from many different perspectives. It is for this reason that critical thinking is for me a world of ideas and thoughts that every second we built in our thoughts. Critical thinking allow us to build and improve our goals. On the other hand, I think the use of technology helped to expand the knowledge of some individuals while in others, has created a drop in support of critical thinking. I say this because I could see how some individuals make good use of technology, while others only use it as a tool to supplement the operation rightful exercise of their brain. A good example we see every day of this criticism is the use of calculators for all math functions, where individuals can’t make any simple exercise of mathematical calculation without the use of the calculator.
On the other hand, if we asked fellow teachers about the meaning of critical thinking we would have different definitions. For me, critical thinking means to think and reflect on what has already been reflected, creating conclusions for answers to my questions with the intention of creating a final product that would be the goal. To me it is like the triangulation of all the questions and answers to reach a better conclusion.