Technology Integration

A wicked problem is defined as one with a complex solution, and that the solution itself will probably open up more problems to tackle as the solver works through the original problem. The variables make the solution very hard to figure out; add to that the changing nature of technology, and you’ve got a “wicked good wicked problem.” “Wicked Good” is a common oxymoronic expression here in Maine.

This in itself is enough of a brick wall to send teachers back to their foxholes and prevent them from using technology on their own, and gets in the way of schools moving forward.

Many folks will say no to this question. I’ve just finished a section of TPCK. In 2003, there was a study by Heeter that compared educational and commercial computer games. That study found that educational games were “easier to learn, less complex, shorter, less challenging to play….” This resulted in a need by the school to bring the games within a certain time slot schools had available. The authors of the study concluded that computer games for schools were schizophrenic as content learning and fun had to be significant components. All one has to do is to go to brainpop.com and check out their “lessons.”

So if complex computer games that result in higher learning don’t fit the school environment, maybe that environment needs to be modified. Hmmm, don’t think that will happen any time soon, but what we can do is to provide ‘after school’ time and ‘before school’ time for students to interact with more complex technologies with adult supervision. Now, that would be interesting !

Yesterday I finally got to play with some computer programming with a younger set.  A few weeks ago, I heard about Scratch, an object based software programming tool.  What fun we had!  I spent no more than five minutes of their hour with me giving them the intro. They’re all on laptops, so I just had them close the lids after they logged in and took them through some of the program’s features. 

In about fifteen minutes, these students were making things move, speak, twirl on their screens. At that time, I said, ” I don’t know how to make two sprites move at the same time, such as having the buffalo chase the dog across the screen.” They really didn’t believe me when I said I didn’t know. So I put that challenge to the group, and within about 10 minutes, two had solutions.

I put their laptops on the projector, and we shared the information. They were equally surprised when I told them, “I’ll bet that there are different ways of doing this same thing, but I don’t know what they might be.” And in about another five minutes, we had a different way of making things move.

I don’t plan a longer lesson with Scratch at this point in the year. With our structure, this program might lend itself well for an “exploratory” in grades 7+8. There are a lot of games that could be group designed and created by teams. But for now, a brief introduction to that tool was a great success.

Oh, by the way , this was a group of 10 third and fourth graders in a small rural school at the gateway to the Northwoods of Maine.

Two weeks ago, a 6th grade science teacher and I worked with his students as they learned about the solar system. On of our first tasks was learning how to modify a search. We googled the phrase “solar system.” On Tuesday noon, the Google search gave 40 million sites. The next day at 10 AM, we worked with a different group. Then, Google search gave 40,200,000 sites. Three hours later, the number was up to 41 million. This morning, two weeks later, I did another google search and found 43,100,000 sites. Makes me wonder about the incredibly increasing information stacks out there. (at the University of Maine, as I am sure at other universities and colleges, we called the library book shelves the “stacks.”)

Such expanding information is the reason why we need to teach our students about smart searching. Some of us digital immigrants are still wondering where the card files went to! -:)

I’ve been noticing the last several years the gender differences related to technology use. In our lab before school, about 27 students (grades 5 and 6 mostly) can be found interacting with each other and the Internet games they have found on sites like MiniClip. (I don’t allow point and shoot or fighting games if you’re wondering about that.)  
 The gender split is 15% female and 85% male.  The girls spend their time, as do the boys, finding desktop pictures, but while boys ride virtual skateboards and trick bikes, girls tend to read stories about Hannah Montana, visit sites like girlsense.com . I’m wondering about what can be done to equalize that ratio. Perhaps it’s because this is a rural area, but more likely than not I suspect time worn sterotyping by well meaning parents is at the root of this. 
Yesterday we broke up the class into boys and girls. Each group had a turn at launching a pumpkin at a target. The boys won the toss and went first. The girls finally won. It was interesting to see how each gender struggles with nailing down the variables such as cannon height, angle, velocity and mass. There was no difference in this third grade group in that regard.
So I’m thinking that to be effective, we need to start in the primary grades. Next week, I’ll introduce computer programming via Scratch, a free program for Macs and PC’s.

Historically, educators have been expected to know their subject matter. This hasn’t changed, of course, but the amount to know has.  When teachers come into the computer lab, they often feel out of place.  A 500 page manual on how to use Office is overwhelming.  Teachers haven’t had time to study it, to really learn any of it.  In fact, they have barely had time to open the manual, relying on the technology integrationist to figure it all out.  
 A defining moment in my own teaching with technology was in the fall of 1996.  We had a brand new windows 95 lab with a 56KB frame connection. It was my first time with Windows.  I had a manual, had skimmed it, had practiced a bit, but found the entire thing rather daunting.  A student asked me a question to which I had no clue how to answer.  So I responded with a question, “Who can help us find that answer?”  Well, several hands shot up, and we had several things to try out.  Together, we figured it all out, and were well on our way to working on our presentations and research.  This was the first time I saw the benefit of collaborative learning with technology. 
The next thing I did was to assign a Virtual Travel project. Students were to plan a trip. But after a student asked me, “Can we travel with a friend?” and I said of course, then the collaboration made the trip become very real to them. Collaboration gives the learner control; the greater the learner control, the longer the learning sticks, and the more meaningful the experience becomes to our students.   

I’ve been receiving listserv items this year that are full of comments about these different operating systems.  There’s a lot of excitement in these posts, and the authors are enthusiastic, positive and seemingly determined. I wouldn’t call them evangelists, but some posts seemed to be “over the top” to me.  I’m reminded of the platform “wars” of the 90’s when I see some of these posts.  But it all got my attention, and today I began some “serious research” about their claims. Is free really better? 

It doesn’t matter if the software is free or not.  It only matters to me that it works, works well, consistently, does what I have come to expect and doesn’t leave me frustrated. If we as technology coordinators and technology specialists have to spend time tweaking the darn tools we use, we’ll never move forward. And the users we support will quickly head for the foxholes, head for the hills, build the brick walls, when we ask them to tweak the tools they would otherwise just use. “I don’t have time for this,” they will say, and you know what? They’re absolutely right.  

 

Popular programs like Inspiration aren’t written for platforms other than Mac or PC. Good thing there’s Freemind   from Sourceforge.   And if the school can’t afford, or doesn’t want to pay for Photoshop Elements, there’s always Gimp. But I find it’s not as easy to use as Elements, especially running on a Mac.

 I would love not to send money to Microsoft,Apple Adobe, etc. by using these free software programs, desktop systems and server systems. The question for me is still: Is doing this better? And are we seeing the beginning of a second platform war?  

 

  

 As school budgets are squeezed more and more due to rising fuel costs, insurance premiums and building maintenance, these alternative routes to technology are becoming more and more popular.  

<a href=”http://technorati.com/claim/d68xrc26ff” rel=”me”>Technorati Profile</a>

A few years ago, technologists would often get into discussions on the appropriate platform (PC or Mac) for schools.  For some, the argument centered around the platform that the students would soon be using “out in the real world.” For others, the argument was how easy or intuitive the system was. Teachers who had PC’s at home, would sometimes struggle with Macs, and vice-versa.  In the last few years, however, I haven’t heard as much about the “platform question,” and would like to assume here that the discussion has diminished.  Now that I’ve had some time using Web 2.0 apps, google docs, google web pages, I’m wondering if the advent of Web 2.0 has been partially responsible for quieting this discussion?

I remember hearing an analogy six or seven years ago that went like this:

   

Imagine if you could bring a teacher from 1800 through time to today’s classroom. The chances are pretty good that the teacher would know the purpose of the room, be able to read the books contained therein, use the chalkboard/whiteboard, and begin teaching writing, basic math, French, etc.  Now take a doctor from 1800 and bring that person through time to today’s operating room.  The chances are pretty good that the doctor might not immediately know what the room’s purpose was or how to use any of the tools save the forceps, scalpel and saws. In fact, that doctor probably couldn’t function in that room very well at all.

 

---

Ok, so you get the point.  Technology in medicine is incredibly advanced compared with technology in education.  But there are some bright spots as some schools do much, much more with educational technology than others.  Today I work in a small, rural school in central Maine where parents work in the woods, in the mill, in the local hosptial, local stores.  Their children’s future is most likely not beyond major Maine metropolitan areas, and they’ll be leaving home to advance financially.  Technology in education can make a huge difference in their futures. Here’s a case in point:

---

In the spring of 1997, our geographically isloated school system at the foot of Moosehead Lake also in central Maine, was about to vote on whether or not to approve a bond of $90,000 for technology software and hardware. The previous year, the community approved $120,000 for telephone, TV, digital network, and two new computer labs.  This second year of three planned bonds, approved by the Board appointed technology committee, was the last major expense.

---

 During the afternoon before the community’s vote on the school budget, I learned that the Board was concerned that the entire budget would be voted down unless it was reduced. They wanted to cut the technology bond completely.  As the chair of the Technology Committee, I met with them in the Principal’s office just before the evening community vote, and convinced the Board to keep the bond at half the original amount instead of cutting it completely.  After the budget vote meeting had convened, a member of the Board made a motion to cut the technology line by half.

---

 Questions were asked. The Superintendent asked me to come out to the stage to answer the first one; then, he held on to my elbow, keeping me there for 45 minutes to answer the rest.  The community was very, very concerned that their children would not have the advantage technology additions would bring. I assured them that “the proposed amount, with the cut, is a step forward.”  They passed the bond, and they would have passed the entire amount had the Board not made a motion to cut. The parents knew. The woods jobs were disappearing quickly; the mills closed, tourism the mainstay from Memorial Day through Labor Day. I can’t recall another instance of the intersection of technology need and parent concern that was so striking.