According to some articles I’ve recently read, there seems
to be very little evidence as to whether technology actually improves student
achievement. In the article “Use of Web
2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based
practice,” Hew & Cheung (2013) found that further research is required in
order to support that Web 2.0 technologies have causal effects on student
achievement. So far, studies have
demonstrated that how they are used (pedagogy) is the determining factor of
whether or not they will improve student achievement. They do note that since Web 2.0 technologies
have not demonstrated a negative impact on student achievement, if is hopeful
that as long as used appropriately, further research will demonstrate their
positive impact.
Many articles, including one in Education News titled “OECD:
Technology in Schools Not Boosting Achievement,” have this theme that moderate usage of technology in the
classroom is key. Students should only
use technology if it will help them achieve the learning targets in a way that
they couldn’t without the use of that technology.
Based on my recent student teaching experience in a 1:1
classroom, I am very interested to see what further research will reveal about
the relationship between technology and student achievement, and then how those
results will impact schools such as my placement school. I tend to agree that too much technology can
do more harm than help, when not used appropriately, and that technology should
only be used when it adds to the learning experience of the lesson. However, I’ve noticed that the teachers I
work with feel pressured by administration to utilize technology throughout
every single class period, almost as just to show that the grant money spent on
having 1:1 technology was well worth it.
I hope that as this first year passes, and the whole school adjusts,
technology will be used because it helps, not just because it can be used.
Another reason teachers may overuse technology is because it
saves time spent at the copier, and therefore paper. Teachers at my placement spend more time
determining how to utilize their in house copy count, than making sure that the
online activity is merited. Hopefully, this
will also change as the school adjusts.
I’m all for saving paper, but I also feel that students benefit from
writing with pen and paper.
All this being said, the use of technology in the classroom
does have its undeniable benefits. They
just might not be clearly based on student achievement, but rather based on
valuable skills students will need in the workforce. Competence in various internet platforms and
effective collaboration are two skills that can and should be taught in the
classroom. Though it is still being
determined whether these skills directly cause students to better learn
specific subject matter, these skills will benefit students in their adult
life. It is the teacher’s responsibility
to make sure that students are collaborating effectively.
In “Assessing collaboration: More than just lip service,”
Siko (2016) describes ways that teachers can evaluate their students
collaborative tasks, making sure that they are truly collaborating and not just
“dividing and conquering” certain tasks.
Through various Web 2.0 platforms, teachers should be able to view
activity logs, such as when and who made edits to a wiki or Google App. Students should also be given an opportunity
to evaluate themselves and their group members on their involvement in
collaboration, and this can be done using a Google form or other online survey
site. Assessment is important in
collaboration because if students are only provided collaborative experiences
but not evaluated on them, they may not even gain the benefit of learning collaborative
skills for the future.
In a nutshell, technology in schools is inevitable, and
students will need to know how to utilize it properly in their futures. Effective teachers will incorporate it wisely
into their curriculum and provide valuable feedback. Further research on causal effects of
technology and collaborative activities on student achievement is needed.
I enjoyed you comment about student benefiting from using pen and paper. I wasn't even a year ago and professors were encouraging me more than ever to make sure to implement reading and writing into my PE class setting. Now, with how fast the schools are becoming so tech savvy, it's totally taking away from some of the writing. Kind of seems like the exact opposite of strategies we were being taught to use before.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I am largely in favor of the technology use in moderation. There is a right time and an unnecessary time for it's implementation. That's my opinion.
Thanks Chris.
DeleteIn response to your last statement, when do you think is the "right time" to implement technology and when is the "unnecessary time?"
After reading the Hands-on Chemistry Experiment article by Selco, and then seeing all of the simulations out there, I feel like I wouldn't change much about how the experiment was designed. It is necessary and appropriate for students to learn and use hands-on lab skills. They are able to learn more about chemical reactions by being able to touch the baggies and feel them heat up. I think the hands-on experience in this case is more valuable than what a simulation could provide. That being said, I would implement technology in a different way for this activity. Since students are working in groups, it would be beneficial to have them put their data in a GAFE. I say this mainly so that the teacher is able to track the collaboration of the group and see who is not contributing. Maybe if students are aware that the teacher can see how well they contribute/participate in the data collection and question making, they will strive harder to participate and, in turn, take away more from the activity. I wonder if this had been an aspect of her experiment, would the test scores have increased even more for students involved?
Hi Clare,
DeleteIn response to what you said about the Selco article, I could see a science teacher using some of the simulations from the phET site to learn some of the equations and how to apply them PRIOR to doing the lab. As you stated, I wouldn't change much about the lab. I also think it's important to gain that hands-on experience in a lab. But the simulations could be used to learn some of the material in a more enjoyable way.
Blane, unfortunately, there's little evidence to support the use of labs for learning. What I mean by that is that the traditional 'recipe' lab (follow the instructions, write a lab report, etc.) does little to affect student achievement; given the costs, many schools limit labs.
DeleteNow, if you make it inquiry-based and open-ended (i.e., less cookbook-like), you can see results; however, these are very time intensive and require teachers to be skilled at inquiry-based instruction. Thus, many don't adopt these types of exercises.
Gotcha. That was such a big part of science class when I was growing up. If anything it teaches you how to follow directions (or a recipe). Even when we had labs in college for chemistry, people would still mess them up. There's really no benefit? Or are you just talking in terms of student achievement?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteClare,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that further research is needed to determine the extent to which technology is effective in educating students. There need to be several empirical studies that engage all age levels of students with various technological learning tools/devises/websites/apps/programs. I also agree with what you said that various technological skills are necessary for the modern worker such as internet platforms and collaborative projects. I teach adult ESL and once a week we have computer lab class where we teach various computer skills that are useful for their everyday lives like creating a job resume, using microsoft word, email, and conducting a job search. Just like for these adults, there are some computer skills that should be taught to students too, but the bulk of student learning should not be while in front of a screen.
I just realized something ironic. Lately, we have been weighing the pros and cons of technology use in the classroom and discussing how much screen time is beneficial vs. harmful. From the posts I've read, I feel like we all agree that students should spend as little time in front of the screen as possible. However, look at each of us in this online course. While I tend to agree with everyone that there must be more to the classroom learning environment than technology tools, we cannot forget how technology has made learning much more accessible. More and more people are able to go back to school and earn degrees because of online courses. Technological advancements are responsible for our individual growth and advancement. Though I'm not the biggest fan of them - I still prefer to be in a classroom - without online courses, earning my teaching certificate would have taken more time and cost due to the inflexibility of regularly scheduled courses.
DeleteWe forget about that. How many of you could pull off this career changes if the GTC program was all local with F2F classes.
DeleteHowever, Michigan was the first state to require K12 students to have an online experience in order to graduate...for that very same reason you mention (experience with tools for future work, ed, and career). The sad part is that most districts took the path of least resistance, and their 'online' experience is generally nothing more than a brief online module that's ungraded (translation: kids plow through it knowing it doesn't count).