Dias raises some interesting and relevant issues around integrating ICT into the classroom. Dias states that there is a need for"moving teachers away from using computers for drill & practice, towards a more integrated approach" I found the comment about teachers receiving training on how to use hardware and software but only a lucky few ever trained how to integrate it quite pertinent. our school receives a lot of training on the use of Mimios and I have noticed that a lot of teachers are still focusing on the how to use the tools on the software, how to use the hardware and not focus on how to use it and integrate it into lessons. I have also noticed this at a number of workshops I have attended where people are more intent on asking questions about how to calibrate the board, how do I turn it on, how do i do this, even when I have presented ideas on how it can be used in other ways in the class, there seems to be this mentality of trying to get heads around the technology first. Not to say that I have seamlessly integrated the Mimio as well as I could have, there are still areas that I need to tweak here and there!
Morton (1996) brings up the term "tool", now as we all know this term is thrown around a lot with lots of different forms of ICT...."oh its just a tool..." "The Mimio is a tool..." etc. I have always had a niggling feeling about the use of the word tool to describe ICT but have never been sure why. Having read what Morton (1996) says I can now begin to understand some of my hesitation with the term . Morton suggests that technology integration is not just seeing the computer as a tool. Morton further suggests that this view suggests that computers are just add-ons and implies that they are then classified in the same field as a blackboard or OHP. Good point! From now on I will endeavor to spread the word about it's usage!
Last year I attended a course run by Jaqui Sharp on integrating ICT into the classroom, it was an interesting experience and I found the information that she provided about the stages of integration beneficial (it was also nice to know I was on the right track!) The 5 stages of integration according to Sandholtz, Ringstaff & Dwyer (1997) are; entry, adoption, adaptation, appropriation and invention. It would be wonderful if all teachers could be in the higher stages but being teachers we know that everyone learns differently and at their own pace. We would not expect our own students to fly through all the stages would we? (would be nice if they did!)
Integration of anything takes time and in particular ICT, as it is an ever evolving area, teachers need to be constantly updating their skills and getting their head around the new technology. Dias points out that the most common barriers to ICT integration include "time, training, resources and support. Teachers need time to learn how to use both the hardware and the software, time to plan and time to collaborate with other teachers."
Yes, but where do we find the time??? Anyone know the answer, please let me know!
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Sprechen sie internet?
What a fascinating and interesting article by Prensky. I find the concept of the digital immigrants "accent" quite amusing, I was reading thinking to my self...well I wouldn't classify myself as a digital immigrant, I don't do that, no not that one either, no...oh hang on....I do sometimes print out my email, and I printed out most of these readings too! Quelle Horreur!
I think it is rather easy to get sucked into what Prensky is saying, the report is easy to read, it makes light of things and it makes for entertaining reading. On further perusal I began to wonder where the research was to back up what Prensky was saying, unfortunately there didn't appear to be any, just anecdotal evidence. Also I think that Prensky makes some large generalizations when he says that "all" our students are digital natives. What happens if they are "brethren?"....sorry that's being a bit facetious! I meant what happens if they come from a background where they do not have, or cannot afford such technology that Prensky claims all students have on their person at any one time. He seems to lump all digital natives together as some form of homogeneous society that learns and interacts in exactly the same ways. As teachers we know that all learners are diverse and bring their own special needs and abilities.
I do agree with Prensky that children think differently now, they are more exposed to technology and are more comfortable with using it and giving it a go. An example from my own class is the use of a Lego Mindstorm robot. I basically showed the children how to set it up and then left them to see how they would cope. Within minutes they had the robot roaming all over the classroom, stopping when they clapped, kicking things, etc, they gave it a go and were not afraid if they got something wrong.
Hmmm so in retrospect what I have written at the start of the post doesn't make sense....perhaps its not such a fascinating and interesting article after all....shame on you Prensky...shame on you!
Just found this on another students blog,
Jamie Mackenzie takes Prensky by the throat and piledrives him into the mat!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
