Creighton says that technology is changing the way we need to address our professional learning. It is no longer just about word processing and blackboard instruction. We have to blend technology into the learning and incorporate everyone inside and outside our learning community. We have to find a way to use technology is a constructivist style so that the students are more in charge of their learning and use the technology as a supporting role with the teachers as guides and co-learners.
The five concepts of constructivist learning are demonstrated in schools, but not to the extent that they need to be. As educators, we strive to build a foundation of skills and knowledge, but don’t always allow the means for students to experiment and creatively solve real-world problems. We instead take all of our standards and make a bulleted list of what has to be covered and when in order to have it done in time for assessments at the end of the semester. We struggle with letting go of command and attention and do not allow for ample time for students to be the teacher in the classroom. I have done a decent job in letting my students collaborate and socialize with each other at different times in their learning. I allow them to share something they learned with a friend, and teach each other in small groups through learning activities, and at times teach the class something they learned or what they discovered. I have tried to include them in discussions of rubrics and collaborated with them in creating ones that went along with projects and writing. I’ve also realized that it makes a bigger impact on the students if I try to integrate subjects so that concepts and standards can be merged and explored (but I still make sure I get all the standards covered before the test in my own checklist). I can easily see how we fail to integrate technology into these concepts. I feel that we need support in learning how to best incorporate technology into these five concepts. How can we serve as guides so the students can learn more on their own? Creighton even states that “technologies are not often used in constructivists ways… but there is potential with the help of a strong technology leader”. Without the help of a strong technology leader and some new insight into how to use the technology in the best ways possible, we will just continue to be poor teachers using technology poorly as Pepi and Scheurman warn.
Unfortunately, a lot of the professional learning that takes place is in the form of workshops and are based on “hot topics” in the county/system or reiterating what’s been learned and discussed before. They are not based on our current needs and are addressed so quickly and without connection or support that they are wasted. Professional learning meetings would definitely take on a different meaning if we were able to focus on what really matters to our school and faculty in a timely manner that allowed for practice of what is learned. Professional learning of technology would greatly be appreciated when learning to follow the constuctivist descriptors. We, like our professional learning times, seldom give students the wait time needed to learn on their own and explore what is being taught. We don’t always focus on what the needs and questions are of our students, but rather call on the students who know the answers to the questions so we can move on in order to get more covered. We may allow time for discussion, but not enough time for collaboration. I’m beginning to see how these topics relate to me in the learning process as I compare them to how I allow my students to learn. I’m leading by example, and my example has not been very good. It’s time for a change.
The tech-related professional learning program was interesting. It allowed all teachers to be involved and made the principal a learning part of every small group. I thought it definitely allowed the principal to be more directly involved and know what was taking place in each group and could definitely provide a lot of insight, information, and knowledge. I also liked that the teachers had to implement what they were learning. That gave them immediate feedback about how things went and what needed to be tweaked or thrown out. It would be helpful to be in this kind of learning environment.
I enjoyed reading the chapter about the resisters and saboteurs. I learned that even these people need to be embraced when trying to implement your technology plan. Everyone needs to be involved. Sometimes those people who are resistant are so because they have been burned in the past because of not having adequate support. They often have valid reasons for why they are resistant and can see things from a different perspective that may need to be taken into consideration. Most are resistant once the implementation has begun and they can be on the inside or outside of the project. Some potential reasons for people having a resistant attitude are not feeling like they are adequate enough to handle what is being asked, unconvinced that technology is a true benefit to the learning process, or concern that technology may replace them. The principal should be willing to help ease these fears and help offer support to those feeling this way instead of only embracing the trailblazers (those ready to jump on board-that's me!), the pioneers (those who will support the plan if it’s worth the effort), and the settlers (those who need more information and detail, but will support). Resisters and saboteurs will come around some if they feel they are supported and validated in their reasoning and they are not having to do additional work but can use technology as a strategy to build on what they are already doing.
Technology is difficult to evaluate. It is not viewed in the same light as the evaluation processes of other subjects and areas. If not evaluated properly, it can be misperceived. Technology is not just having computers in your room that are turned on. It’s not just about having your Smartboard on in the room when the evaluator comes through. It needs to be carefully evaluated for how it is being used. It needs to clearly support the standards and learning objectives. I liked the framework showing that the focus should be on active learning on a high technological level. When engaged learning is happening, the teacher should be a facilitator, a guide, a co-learner and co-investigator; while the student is being an explorer, a cognitive apprentice, and a producer of knowledge. In order for students and teachers to take on those roles, principals should be supportive of the curriculum and offer ways and strategies for the teacher to connect his/her learning to technology in the most effective way. Right now I think that our school as a whole is “still in the barn” as you said.
Creighton says that it is important to be both a leader and a manager. The two work closely together to make your plan work best. The take-away that I got from him was that we already have high expectations and standards in place that we are teaching and we just need to realize that technology can be incorporated into what we are doing to make the learning more authentic and meaningful. We have to develop a technology plan that works for us at our school and that can be implemented with attainable goals. It has to be a plan that can be embraced by and involves the teachers, administrators, students, parents, and community. If we do those things and are offered ample support by our leaders to make it happen, we can have a successful technology plan and provide the best learning environment for the students.
