Technology Is Optional?
March 23, 2008 by Brian Crosby
“You can teach a lesson effectively without technology, and students can learn without it.”
Agreed … I teach some effective lessons without it and I learned things in school without it and so did my parents and their parents. Einstein was pretty smart I’ve heard, and he didn’t have the technology available to him that we do now (although I wonder how he would have reveled in the connections to learning he could have made outside of school if he had web 2.0 tools? Didn’t he have issues in school? Edison too). I bet a student could start kindergarten this year and go all the way through high school and maybe even college without using very much technology (but none? I don’t think so) and even get good grades and seemingly have received a good education. Would you want to be that student with few technology skills entering the job market? Or how about your own kids … would you want that for them? And remember we are looking 12 to 16 or so years out for this kinder to graduate. And if you are looking at students from Title 1 schools, remember they don’t always acquire all the same cell phone skills as their more well off contemporaries much less other technology skills.
The same could be said I’m sure when the transition was made from the quill pen to cartridge ink so you didn’t have to stop and dip your quill in ink after every few letters. If you were in business or a writer at the time would you have wanted to be stuck with the quill as your only option? You could still write your book or letter or paper, but how much faster and neater could your work be? Did many hang on to the quill for very long if they wrote a lot if they had access to cartridge pens?
So yes, it could be said that Title 1 students can be taught and learn without easy access to technology … but is that in their best interest? They don’t have access at home to training in the skills that would help them be good readers either and look at how that affects their learning and life.
So is technology really optional? Is there some “level” of tech savvy that is “good enough” for students? What if a student would make a better connection to learning through technology access (or music or sports or the arts or ?), are language and math skills really THE most important skills for EVERYONE? Are students guaranteed equal access to schools or learning by the constitution? If so then shouldn’t schools have to make different pathways to learning available so all students have an equal chance to learn? If you don’t think that students have equal access guaranteed, would more options still give more students a better chance of doing well in school? Would that pay for itself in less crime and prisons?
Lots to think about.
Create a free edublog to get your own comment avatar (and more!)
Excellent questions! Students need something to set themselves apart. The number of minimum wage jobs out there is only going to increase. And something tells me that the workers who will fill those positions will be people whose teachers used the minimum number of tools in their tool box. We can sit back and do what we’ve always done, but where has that gotten us? NCLB. We need to branch out and use everything we can! Some students will only encounter computers at school. Districts pour millions of dollars into technology every year. Shouldn’t we probably put that money to use? And if we don’t, is it because the students wouldn’t be interested? Or because we aren’t?
Good post! Most, if not all students will develop computer skills without us. Why not assist them in this process, and foster in students a spirit of responsible digital citizenship? The alternative is that we sit around and hope they figure out how to use computers effectively and appropriately from myspace.
I agree with Joel that most students will develop computer skills without us BUT there’s a fundamental difference in the way Title I students typically use computers from the way their higher income peers do. Often, Title I students use it only for remediation, drill-and-kill type activities whereas at higher income schools students use it for creating their own media.
My students are only in the second grade but they’re already getting messages from their teachers about how to use technology and those messages will be with them for the rest of their lives. I’m afraid that without getting access to technology now they’re not going to have the comfort level that their peers have and that will certainly affect their ability to get a job later.
I just discovered your blog, so forgive the delay in getting my comment out on a more current article. I really enjoyed reading this particular piece. Two years ago, our Shop class was removed from the master schedule and Home Ec disappeared long ago. The staff to this day complains that we don’t have electives that cater to the masses and teach life skills to those students who are not honors-bound. To us, the Guerrilla Tech Integrators on campus, those few teachers on staff who support technology integration but whose enthusiasm for using technology as a tool to teach is eye-rolled by the masses, we see technology as filling that niche. To the teachers who are unfamiliar and uncomfortable with technology and who grew up “just fine without it,” tech is a thing for the elite. We, however, believe that it is our duty as Title I teachers to help bridge gaps using these strategies. If schools are bound to help birth citizens capable of entering a work-force, then we are further bound to teach them the skills that will be an everyday expectation for their generation. Technology is not just for the honors students. These should not just be Advanced electives in any school. They should be for every student in order to even the playing field, and to train our students in the minimum that will one day be expected of them. I do not suggest cutting off all paper and pen and textbook education; but to not train our students in technology is throwing a future generation back to the era in which their teachers were once taught.