EDLD+5364+Teaching+with+Technology+Week+2+Reflection

Reflection:

This weeks reading and videos have been enlightening and informative. There is one main point that stuck with me. "There is, however, evidence in some of these studies that learning technology is less effective or ineffective when the learning objectives are unclear and the focus of the technology use is diffuse." (Schacter, 1994) Many of the articles provided a lot of proof that using technology helped students achievement but there was a great disparity in how much improvment was made. In reading more of the articles, I noticed that just using technology was not enough to help students. Teachers need to provide clear objectives for students so they can better direct their own learning and not become side-tracked. Today's students are digital natives who constantly ask "why" so in order not to turn them off, we need to provide the answer. I have been guilty of this injustice. Although my students are only 4-5 years old, I sometimes did not inform of them of why we were using technology. I was just happy to be able to let them use it. One of the other areas I became interested in was the impact of technology on "nontraditional" students. "Classroom computers, it appears, may have had positive effects on at-risk children." (Page, 2002) I have noticed this in my own classroom. My students are able "wake up" the computer, access the internet on their own and navigate to bookmarks selected for them. Their confidence increases when they are able to do this and their learning increases. I have also witnessed this in my own son, who is developmentally delayed due to seizure disorder. He is able to use a computer and his Ipod touch without any assistance from me. I also noticed that while using an app on his Ipod, he was telling me the beginning letter and sound of each picture. I had not expected this from him and was very surprised and pleased. I know that student use of technology is the future of their learning, however teachers need to ensure that objectives are clearly stated and the right kind of technology is used for the right student.

Schacter, John (1994). The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievement. p. 10, retrieved March 6, 2011 from @http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf

Page, M. (2002). Technology-enriched classrooms: effects on students of low socioeconomic status. Journal of Research On Technology in Education, Retrieved from www.iste.org

Computers appear to be especially productive with children designated as nontraditional. Although the term is often used to refer to a variety of non-normal groups of learners, a simple definition of the nontraditional student might be made by referring to those children who have, justifiably or not, been labeled as being low achieving, at risk, learning disabled, of low socioeconomic status, educationally disadvantaged, language minority, or needing instruction with English as a second language (Burnett, 1981; Wood, Buescher, & Denison, 1979).

Most of my PK students fit into 2 to 3 of the "nontraditional" student designation. Most will be low achieving, are at risk for numerous reasons, of low socioeconomic status and educationally disadvantaged (parents will or can not help). I have seen my students change on the day we have computer lab. I taught them how to turn on the computer or wake it up, access the internet and find the bookmarks for them. I have 2 students that have remembered (after only 1 time showing them) how to access another page available to them. They already know they better do their Monday night homework or they will be doing it during computer lab and they do not want to miss their computer time. I do not tell them what sites they can access but it is amazing to see most of them access the science sites and games. I continuously praise them for how much they have learned to do with the computer and it shows in their positive attitude. I am on a mission to have more teachers allow students to use more technology in the classroom so we can avoid our students becoming low achievers.

Burnett, D. G. (1981). Introduction: The humanities and nontraditional studies. Alternative Higher Education: The Journal of Nontraditional Studies, 6(1), 3–6. Wood, P. C., Buescher, T. M., & Denison, C. (1979). Alternative opportunity program: Stemming potential delinquency in young adolescents. Behavioral Disorders, 4, 232–238.