Reflections (Kelly)
Reflection #1
At the core of UDL is the premise that often the curriculum is disabled (and disabling!). It is not flexible; it often poses barriers, and consequently prevents rather than supports optimal learning experiences. Do you agree or disagree with this view? Why or why not?
Reflection #2
What are the benefits of analyzing the curriculum for strengths and weaknesses rather than focusing on the student’s strengths and weaknesses? What are the challenges of this approach?
Reflection #3
How can using a variety of materials and methods reach more of the learners within your classroom? What are the benefits of doing so? What are the challenges?
Reflection #4
What barriers are inherent in traditional assessments? What are the challenges in offering varied options for assessment?
Reflection #5
Given the realities of our modern age and the demands of our children’s future, is it really okay to allow teachers to choose whether or not they incorporate modern technologies into their instruction?
Reflection #6
TBA
October 16th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
All teachers need to incorporate new technology in their classrooms. The schools need to provide the equipment and also the mentoring to learn about the new technology. Older teachers can teach but need the help to get up to speed, Collaborating with younger staff and sharing their ideas and methods with younger teachers and finding new ways to promote the information can really improve our schools. but there are things blocking even new teachers from implementing some of the new methods. They cannot get to sites they need to use to teach and do not have the ability to get up to date software loaded on their machines.
October 16th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
It is important to incorporate technology into all subjects. Teachers will benefit by including technology, I like it for so many reasons, for my students and myself – to gather ideas, a media tool to create artwork, etc. Technology is used in every facet of our lives now. Students need to have the time to explore and create using technology. It is a wonderful way to engage all students, So, no I do not think teachers should be allowed to choose not to incorporate technologies into their instruction
November 19th, 2011 at 12:47 pm
Reflection #1- I do agree with this statement. I truly believe the curriculum poses barriers. I feel as though my freedom to teach the way I would like has been taken away. I used to have flexibility and freedom. Now it seems I have to do exactly what everyone else is doing. Each teacher has their own unique students, this should not be a one size fits all approach. I feel like the curriculum creates that. The deadlines and testing prohibits our creativity and our ability to reach all of our learners.
November 19th, 2011 at 12:52 pm
Ann –
Yes, you said!! I think that piece that has been missing forever is the assessment piece. For many years the buzzword in education has been differentiated instruction. So we differentiate instruction but we do no differentiate assessment. Hmmm…..maybe there is some professional development opportunities in that.
November 19th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Reflection #1 – I completely agree with this point of view. At the core of this idea is the fact that our students are all given the same summative assessments, specifically in math and literacy. Given the fact that they are all different learners, asking them to show what they have learned by giving them all the same written test, completely goes against the fundamentals of UDL. Knowing that we have to prepare the students for the test, prevents us, as teachers, from being flexible in our teaching and the way we spend our time in the classroom. We also are confronted with the barrier of time. Lesson plans, grading, PLC time, team time, monthly reports, team log, copies, IEP meetings, and communication with parents are all time consuming tasks. Our time could be better spent on creating enriching learning experiences that motivate and truly allow us to find out what the students have learned.
November 19th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
While I agree that current curriculum is disabling our students, I feel it is a result of a much larger problem. Our curriculum is driven by standardized tests composed by State officials that are far removed from the classroom. In my opinion, their motivations directly conflict with the ideals of most teachers. As teachers we want to help foster an environment that creates inquisitive, independent students that can problem solve, relate to others, and challenge the world around them. State requirements want compliance and factual data to back up that every student is meeting expectations, regardless of the fact that many of these are unrealistic expectations.
November 19th, 2011 at 12:58 pm
Well said. Totally agree!
November 19th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
In this school district, I do agree that the curriculum tends to pose massive barriers for learners. The blame extends far beyond the borders of this town, however, reaching up to state and federal level with mandates that children be able to perform at a range beyond their developmental abilities. We talk about the fact that “one size does not fit all,” yet our government dictates that we take every “size” child, every style learner, and cram him or her into this rigid, little box of standardized testing. NJASKs, Benchmark Assessments, DRAs, SRIs: all of these assessments spew out data that effectively makes our students into numbers and wipes out their uniqueness as learners, and is many times not a true testament of their abilities. But our curriculum demands that we “teach” these students to effectively take these tests, and thus disables our ability to help them learn for the sake of learning, no matter what form it takes. Unfortunately, this is a sad testament to the unpreparedness of our students to successfully navigate “real life” once they leave our four walls. In many ways, I feel we fail these kids by doing our jobs as directed. But I suppose that is what classroom doors are for… closing.
November 19th, 2011 at 1:02 pm
DI – I seriously just got chills reading your blog!!
November 19th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
Each of us has the power and opportunity to bring the curriculum to our students so that the student is not disabled. When you stop and really think about it, it is a shift in thinking. Since the higher ups never think this way, UDL feels like it has become a paradigm shift. It is each one of us that can bring this to light. As Theodore Roosevelt said “Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.”
November 19th, 2011 at 12:58 pm
I am sure that at its core, some of the curriculum goals are important, while others may be outdated and useless to our future learners. With that being said, the flexibility should really come from the way that those goals are achieved and the modalities that the students are allowed to achieve them. The curriculum, while imperfect, are still challenges to the teacher and the student alike. Often, the way that our students are asked to tackle these challenges, are in one modality such as a written response, a report or perhaps an oral presentation. Flexibility should be provided to the student by the teacher to express their understanding of the curriculum through a number of different avenues with an emphasis placed on creative or technological endeavors. Furthermore, the teacher needs to be equally as flexible to allow the students to use their available tools and experiences to express their knowledge. Of course this poses a challenge in the current class room environment. A lack of resources, combined with a lack of teacher knowledge about how to use certain resources doesn’t allow for various modalities of learning.
November 19th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
I don’t agree that the curriculum itself is disabling. To me the curriculum is an outline of the content and skills that we would like all students to come away with. How they are acquiring the content and skills is the disabling part. In order to become more interactive and true learners, they need to have the option to help make decisions about how they best learn through the use of technology. They would be supported by experienced teachers, or mentors who too are constantly utilizing these technologies in their daily planning of options to share with the students. In this idealistic, but attainable approach, students and teachers will educate each other, which would lead to breaking down the barriers that exist in our current approach.
November 19th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
I agree with everyone when the issue of assessment comes up. We’re always asked to differentiate instruction, and now provide technology to express understanding when those creating our state assessment haven’t reflected on the changes in the classroom. Those that are making the tests are not communicating effectively with educators and those who are on the front lines of teaching.
November 19th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
I agree with this statement that the curriculum, often times, poses a barrier to education. Our current curriculum is not geared for our “technology native” students. We are asked to provide our students with information in an avenue that is not always accessing their optimal learning style. For example, the paper and pencil assessments that we are still using in our classrooms today, do not truly evaluate a child’s actual learning. What is needed is a curriculum that is more flexible that will support an optimal learning experience. Our classrooms today need to reflect more of a student’s ability to think and learn rather than a “one size fits all” assessment. In other words, our classrooms today, need to reflect more of a student’s strategy for learning not just their ability to restate facts and pass the state mandated test. We need more practical resources that reach the variety of different learning styles we have in our classrooms.
November 19th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
I agree with this statement that the curriculum is disabling. As teachers, we have to follow such rigid guidelines in our curriculum that time is limited. There are so many innovative ways that our students can demonstrate their knowledge; however, we do not have the time or the resources needed in order for this to occur in our classrooms.
At the present time, we are focused on “traditional” assessments, so I feel it is my job to prepare my students to successfully earn a “passing” score on these types of tests. This takes up a lot of my instructional time so finding time to integrate technology is challenging. Ultimately, my focus should be on the growth of the individual student rather than a test score. We need to all come together on a common goal and really focus on the child and the learning process instead of focusing on “passing” a standardized test.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:07 am
When you just focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the curriculum, your focus is on only one aspect, the “what” of the student’s learning. You are more concerned, or caught up in the limited ways that the students could acquire their knowledge, than being concerned with what are the strengths and weaknesses of my students and how can I bypass the limited approaches in the curriculum to maximize student learning. A curriculum analysis should not be limited to the “what” but should include the how which then naturally incorporates the why because the students become the creators of their own knowledge with all three principals involved.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:08 am
Reflection #2 – Analyzing the curriculum for strengths and weaknesses does have its benefits. If you do this, you can pinpoint the concepts that students truly need to move on in their academic careers. From there, you can tailor your lessons by implementing the principles of UDL and therefore meet the needs of the multitude of learners within your classroom. The challenges can be numerous. First, the curriculum is a mile wide, so this task will be time consuming. Also, eliminating parts of the curriculum that you deem unnecessary is something that is frowned upon by administration. In the end though, the students will gain knowledge of how they learn best and be engaged in their learning, which is our ultimate goal as educators.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:17 am
Jen -
I think you hit it right on the head – eleiminating what is not necessary. If we feel the pressure of having one more thing added to the pile of what we have to teach, then our students feel it as well! We wonder why our kids aren’t “thinking” – how can they think when so many are just giving them “one more thing to do”? It is not a race, is not a check off list – we want these kids to think and discover and problem solve…..UDL allows that.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:09 am
Well, I think one of the benefits of analyzing the curriculum for strengths and weaknesses is that you can determine if the curriculum is age appropriate. What standards are developmentally appropriate for our students and which standards could be addressed in different grades. Analyzing the curriculum is a good start however the challenge lies in addressing the curriculum and also addressing the needs of different types of learners. One approach to teaching will not work. We not only have to take a look at our curriculum but seriously take a look at how we are teaching it.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:21 am
Now there is a whole other can of worms Ann!! Developmentally appropriate – in our efforts to outdo other countries we are pushing things down thinking we can catch up….Finland has gotten so much press lately on their education system. Their children do not even go to school until they are 7!!! If our kids aren’t reading in kindergarten we think they have a learning disability. Now there is an example of the currriculum being disabling!! Did you ever realize how many children wear glasses now? It is because their bodies are reacting to say hey, wait a minute…my eyes should be doing this strenous task of reading at such a young age. Ugh!!
November 20th, 2011 at 11:23 am
So much of what we do is developmentally inappropriate. I totally agree!
November 20th, 2011 at 11:10 am
The benefit of analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the curriculum is that by doing so, you can attempt gage the level of student fascination or boredom. The curriculum needs to be taught either way, so if you get a sense of the level of enthusiasm from the get go, you can design your lesson plans that incorporate different levels of student engagement. For instance, teaching grammar skills to students might not be their favorite thing to do, however presenting the challenge of understanding grammar skills through games, diagramming, video presentations and other technology will engage the students in ways that have them learning seemingly mundane subjects in more exciting ways. Furthermore, students want to know “how this relates to me?” and “what do I need this for?”. By showing them fun and practical learning applications, using technology as the basis for much of that learning, then students will more likely to see the real life relevance of the curriculum goal. The point is to get students to “buy in” to the learning process rather than just make it through a seemingly irrelevant lesson.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:16 am
Redirecting focus from students to curriculum really helps to embrace the philosophy behind UDL. It makes me think of the famous quote from the movie Field of Dreams….”If you build it, they will come.” If a teacher designs the material to be flexible, accessible, and engaging, the children will show up. Regardless of the students’ strengths or weakness, the UDL formatting will have something to hook each learner.
There are many challenges to this new approach. It is time consuming. The teacher must create lessons that include technology, for which many teachers this is out of their comfort zone. Resistance from parents and administration to buy into the ideas of having the learners explore and take ownership of their own learning, rather than the traditional classroom skill and drill format. Even the technology (sometimes archaic school district versions) may even get in the way. With those challenges, it is still vital to recognize the learners of today are so different and we need to embrace that, not shy away. So build it and they will come!
November 20th, 2011 at 11:25 am
I agree with you Carrie in the “build it and they will come” philosophy. We can’t always change what we’re supposed to be teaching, but we can certainly change how we’re teaching it.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:25 am
One of my worries is that students will get used to having this varied approach, and then they move onto the next grade and are stuck back in “the box” again.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:26 am
Good point, Carrie. Having everyone, parents and administrators, buy into this idea has to be part of the plan as well.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:17 am
When analyzing the curriculum for its strengths and weakness, I find that it enables me to fill in the blanks with my own activities using my own judgment as a teacher. Many times we talk about how we are not treated like the professionals that we are because we are not given a say as to how information should be presented. It is important to be able to adjust the lessons to suit our learners. The downside is that students’ experiences with the same material are varied, and even though all of the curriculum is covered by all the classes, the concepts given greater focus varies from classroom to classroom, depending on what the individual teacher felt needed more attention. I have to assume that this is where the push for standardized testing came from, to ensure that every student is learning the same thing. But by evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of our curriculum, we are able to allow our students better access to education
November 20th, 2011 at 11:30 am
Di-
I’d like to meet the person who invented standardized testing just to ask them what they were thinking!! I know school districts, the state, the country, wants some way to gauge how our students are doing, but we all know the way in which we are testing is not the best. And to prolong this standardized testing way is not doing us any favors. I guess unless we all were programmed to think exactly the same way, have the exact same background knowledge and experiences then we could all meet the bar that is moving ahead without thinking about how to get there.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:24 am
There are benefits of analyzing the curriculum for strengths and weaknesses. It is important for teachers to know the content and become comfortable with it in order to take it a step further and teach it and allow students to produce end products that reflect their learning. We need to understand what exactly we need to teach while seeking ways for our students to achieve the goals of the curriculum. However, there may be challenges of this approach. The curriculum may be too overwhelming that we may find it difficult to see clear goals. It may be filled with a lot of information to cover, so teachers may feel like they are running on a treadmill—trying to cover more in a marking period, but not covering it in the most qualitative manner. My motto this year is quality not quantity. I’ve learned to focus on the most important skills and teach the essentials needed for my student to be successful. I feel that they will benefit much more focusing on clear goals I set for the class rather than trying to cover an enormous amount of material found in the curriculum.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:28 am
I feel there are many benefits in analyzing the curriculum’s strengths and weaknesses rather than focusing on individual students’ strengths and weaknesses. First of all, when we analyze the curriculum we are looking at a broad topic rather than an individual. For example, analyzing whether or not the curriculum provides multiple means of representation of a particular content is important than just presenting it in one format. Making sure the curriculum provides many avenues to reach all learners is more important. Secondly, the curriculum should have lessons that allow learners to select from many formats to represent what they know and communicate it to others. Lastly, it is beneficial to analyze whether the curriculum provides tools that engage the students. When students use many of the tools for classroom work as they do at home, it makes learning more relevant to their lives. When we evaluate the curriculum, we are designing lessons that are flexible and engage student’s right from the start.
November 20th, 2011 at 11:28 am
Ari, I can not agree more that students NEED games, technology, and a variety of approaches to help reach them. As a teacher, I know I can not handle sitting for eight hours listening to one speaker….how can we expect that from children?
December 3rd, 2011 at 2:57 pm
We’ve always known that not everyone learns in the same way. By using a variety of materials and methods, it opens up the possibilities for all students to access education, not just the ones that learn in the one way material is being presented. This helps get to the core purpose of education, which is helping students learn. There is also the added benefit of seeing a child’s true comprehension of material, as opposed to a child’s ability to follow guidelines and spit out a product. The biggest challenges that I see are (1) lack of access to technology, and (2) loss of momentum once a child moves into a new classroom that does not provide the variety of learning and expression.
December 3rd, 2011 at 2:57 pm
If we immediately make the assumption that there are multiple learning styles, then we can also make the assumption that providing information in a multitude of ways can only enhance the learning of students. With UDL, I think that we now have changed our philosophy of how we design our lessons. If we keep our objective in mind and find various ways to reach that objective in our class, then you should find more student engagement, which in turn increases learning and performance. Challenges? Well, initially we’ll use up our most valuable resource…time. So many roads to take, and not enough time time travel down all of them. Hopefully the investment of time now leads to less time circling back to re-teach lessons later.
December 3rd, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Absolutely! Utilizing a variety of methods and materials will reach more of the learners within my classroom. The most difficult challenge for teaching a bunch of eleven and twelve year-olds is grabbing their attention and keeping their interest. If you always do the same thing over and over again, the students will get bored and tune the teacher out. Students at this age would prefer to get involved and become active in their own learning. Rather than a lecture whereas the teacher spouts the knowledge, using research and googledocs and googlepresentation, the students learn, support each other and teach each other. Students gain so much more than just the content knowledge- they gain a desire and passion to learn.
December 3rd, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Oh my goodness- all children do not learn the same way! By using a variety of materials and methods we can reach all students. We can tap into their individual strengths and not require them to respond to only one method of instruction. This does not work, students are individuals and we must treat them as so. Using a variety of materials and methods will also increase student engagement. Students will have choices in how they learn and they can choose different methods each time. This will prevent boredom and prevent students falling asleep in class.
The challenge of this is for educators to buy into it. Yes-it does require some work but the ends justify the means. Some educators however, may not want to put in the extra effort or they simply may just be afraid of it. We also need the support of administration to teach the way we feel is right for our students. They need to understand that at times we may need to step out of the curriculum to reach our students the best way we can.
December 3rd, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Challenges? Absolutely! Teachers have too much to do and not enough time! With more and more administrative demands- and stresses that students need to improve standardized test scores- and unreasonable amount of grading requirements for a report card grade- adds to the challenge of rushing through an amazing learning experience because we have to get through the requirements. Sometimes I feel like I am always assessing. This does not equate to student “learning!
December 3rd, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Using a variety of materials and methods will reach more learners within the classroom. This will happen because each child learns differently. For example, a child might be able to read text and comprehend it, while another child needs the text auditory, and yet another may need to read it aloud to them self. The benefits are that you are allowing the child to choose the option that works best for them and they can learn according to their own style. We can then see what they truly have learned. This does present challenges for us as educators. First, it requires planning. It also requires these resources to be readily available. Furthermore, it requires a change in thinking on the part of the parents of your students and most importantly, of our administration. Finally, we have to keep in mind that in the end, our standardized tests do not offer these options for our students, and therefore, they need to be able to show what they know even if it does not cater to their learning style.
December 3rd, 2011 at 3:07 pm
The clear benefit of using a variety of materials and methods with learners is the idea that students are given choices. These choices help foster the true idea that they take ownership of their learning. Exposing them to various methods helps students realize as individuals we can approach learning tasks from various angles and still do so successfully. Students also gain confidence in their abilities to problem solve and create their success.
Having these open-ended methods can be faced with several challenges. Students, teachers, parents, and administration can be uncomfortable with this process. Teachers can get overwhelmed by all the resources available and uncomfortable with not having the mastery of each one. Students may get uncomfortable with not being spoon-fed, but forced to explore. Parents and administrators may become uncomfortable wondering if the students will succeed with the “non-typical” approach. Other challenges and roadblocks include limited resources and the reliability of those resources. Even with these challenges, helping foster a future of inquisitive and problem-solving thinkers should be our ultimate goal.
December 3rd, 2011 at 3:08 pm
Ann- I agree with you, but administration is more concerned about pleasing the state legislators and being in compliance than student learning– I do feel the support–so sad.
December 3rd, 2011 at 3:10 pm
How can using a variety of materials and methods reach more of the learners within your classroom? What are the benefits of doing so? What are the challenges?
Using a variety of materials and methods when teaching, allows you to tap into students’ strengths. Some of the benefits for doing this provide different avenues for students to acquire content, process ideas, and demonstrate their understanding. Students can work alone or collaboratively. They can use an auditory or visual approach or be practical or more creative. The use of technology can enhance some of the low-tech strategies like highlighting, books on tape, making diagrams or charts. The use of linguistics and a non-linguistic approach goes along with the idea that our brains store information in two ways. (words and mental pictures) When combined, these dual channels increase retention and learning. The challenging part of implementing this flexible format of learning is the limiting structure of our current school day. So much of our day is segmented into separate disciplines, rather than making it a project based approach. This structure would require teachers to plan the parts of the projects so that all disciplines are being met, yet a nonce implemented it would take on a more natural flow where teachers serve as mentors.
The other challenge is to have working technology, or computers, for all students to utilize wherever they are in the project. Bottom Line? Time, money, and a re-thinking of what it really means to deliver an “efficient” way of educating.
December 3rd, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Using a variety of materials and methods reaches more of my learners within my classroom. Students have various needs and different learning styles. They learn in different ways so using different materials is crucial. There is so much technology that supports differentiation. Software, word processing, and other Internet resource allow students to access content, develop understanding, and then ultimately demonstrate what they know. Enhancing lessons using these resources actively engages students and keeps them interested then hopefully leads them to want to learn more. Creating life long learning is my ultimate goal as a teacher.
The challenges of using all of these wonderful resources and methods take a lot of time to develop. As a teacher there are so many daily demands. Finding the time to really explore programs and discover new ways to teach many concepts covered in a curriculum are limited. However, taking steps toward implementing these materials and methods is definitely time well spent!! We all need more of it!!
December 4th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
Yes and No! As a classroom teacher who is a digital immigrant, I am not always comfortable with incorporating technology for the sake of saying that I am incorporating technology. But when the technology has a genuine purpose to further enhance education, I think it is a no-brainer. But that’s me. Working with teachers who spread the gamut from tech savvy to tech inept, I see how force-feeding technology makes many become resistant and shut down. I think my answer really is yes and no. We have to accept that this technology can aid our learners, but we have to provide the training and means to make teachers buy into the idea.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
I agree that training is key, Diane.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
But you didn’t answer the question. Can they choose? Or is the force feeding of technology what needs to occur to ensure successful students?
December 4th, 2011 at 4:33 pm
Sure I did: Yes and No!!!
)
December 4th, 2011 at 4:24 pm
Reflection #5
My initial response to this question would be, “Would I want my child in a class where the teacher chooses not to use technology? What is the other option? Status quo? Weather it was good teaching, or even incredible teaching, what you are essentially doing is handicapping students if you choose not to incorporate technology. If we are supposed to prepare students for jobs that haven’t even been created yet, then what are we preparing for now if we aren’t using the tools of the future?
December 4th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
It is definitely not alright for teachers to have a choice whether or not to incorporate technology in their classrooms. School districts should provide the materials and the training for teachers to use it technology in their classrooms. They then should require all teachers be accountable for incorporating this technology in their lessons. Administrators could check for it by reading lesson plans and observing lessons. If we don’t require teacher’s to use modern technology they will be failing their students. We need to address the needs of all learners and to do this we must require our educators get on board and incorporate modern technologies in their instruction.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
I don’t think it is okay in any way to allow teachers to choose whether or not to incorporate modern technologies into their instruction. I don’t think it is even a question as to whether we should or should not begin to engage our kids, to speak to their brains and address the way they are wired. If you do not subscribe and buy into this way of teaching, you are creating a class of students that are tuned out to you and your instruction. I think you are basically wasting your time and theirs if you do not in some way begin to infuse digital media into your lessons. It is necessary for us to begin speaking their language and preparing them for this global world. Instead of preparing them for our past, we need to prepare them for their future.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Teachers need to be taught and motivated to embrace the technology. Once teachers are able to see what their classroom could look like, they would be excited and accept the new methods and tools for teaching. Teachers refuse to use the technology because they are afraid. The fear of not being the expert or not in control needs to be addressed. If proper training occurs, teachers WILL want to use the technology, and this question becomes obsolete, along with the traditional methods of teaching.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
I agree completely!! It will may be difficult to convince others that this is the way to go.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:31 pm
All teachers have their own comfort level with technology. Being a digital immigrant myself, I have struggled with the comfort of using technology in my classroom due to my fear of the unknown. After having taken this course, I now see there is no way I cannot begin to incorporate more technology in my classroom. The reality is children today are digital natives who need to receive information quickly from multiple sources. They need to be able to be actively engaged in order to learn. The information I present must be able to reach different learners with various learning styles. The only way I can see this would work, would be to incorporate technology into my classroom.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:31 pm
Every teacher has a different comfort level with the use of technology. It is definitely something we, as teachers, need to embrace and utilize on a daily basis; however, we need ample time to learn and explore all that the World Wide Web has to offer. We need the time to discover new ways to implement technology into our lesson plans. Also, we need the tools in order to implement it, and this is a real challenge. It can be very frustrating for teachers who have these great ideas and then hit a barrier they realize the computers are not available. Schools districts must provide the children with computers in order for us to design our universal classroom! I can’t wait for this to happen! In the meantime, I’m going to continue to explore and discover on my own and will be ready for my future classroom!
December 4th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Unfortunately, it depends on your perspective. Are you an administrator feeling pressures from State mandates that all your students must flourish under archaic state testing? Then the answer may be to continue on the traditional methodology that matches the traditional testing. What about an administrator that is told budgets and staff will continually be cut year after year? If they don’t have the money to support technology, how can they demand teachers incorporate what they can not provide?
Are you asking an overwhelmed and overworked teacher? All the teachers I know want their students to succeed. These overwhelmed teachers are STILL excited by the prospects of new ideas and tools IF GIVEN TRUE training and resources. I feel teachers would see the value in having modern technology incorporated because they would see their students thrive and flourish in that environment. I feel teachers do understand this MUST occur, but don’t know how to tackle it.
December 4th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
If in education we had practiced the philosophy of Piaget when he said “The principal goal of education is to create men and women who are capable of doing new things, not simply repeating what other generations have done we might have only been knee deep into our current dilemma. It is our job as educators to develop young people to be creative, inventive and who have minds that can be critical. The answer is not a choice. We must find ways to help one another incorporate modern technologies into our instruction. Our students can be the tools to help us accomplish this. We have to demand that we be immersed into the use and practice of the current technologies on a weekly basis, make the best use of our PLC work so we don’t get deeper and deeper and further and further behind especially because of all the the new technologies that are just on the horizon.