A collection of random final thoughts with more questions than answers:
Will Richardson suggested that the way today’s students learn is different when compared to adults who grew up without technology. I would reframe this belief and propose that human beings learn in the same way now as did our parents, grandparents, great grandparents etc. Children learn what their environment demands. The only thing that's changed is the stuff around us. We learn based on our surroundings.
As long as schools are brick and mortar facilities, where groups of similarly aged people come together in one room for a set period of time, social aspects of education will reign supreme over anything technology can offer. And why shouldn't they? Learning to interact with others in a real face-to-face environment is arguably the best attribute of public education. Schools fill roles other than student learning.
Richardson also said that the advances in technology make it a hugely challenging time to be an educator. I would suggest that may not be the case for many teachers. It's only challenging for those who strive to keep up with, and integrate, technology into their instruction practices. Does that make the teachers who don't take up this challenge worse teachers than those who do?
I sometimes wonder what teachers from a long time ago would think about modern educational constructs like authenticity, communication and collaboration, and student construction of their own knowledge. For example, this is an 8th grade test from 100 years ago. How did teachers get their 8th graders to pass a test this difficult? I’m sure students of yesteryear wondered "Why do I need to learn this?" The differences between then and now lie in the collective values held by parents, teachers, administrators, and communities.
Regarding the notion of authenticity, what’s genuine and realistic to one person may be meaningless to the next person. Can teachers really create authentic lessons for all students when they are strapped with standards based content and measured by their performance on standardized tests?
Do attributes like discipline and fortitude matter anymore? It seems like many people no longer value the skills, dispositions, and knowledge base required to pass a rigorous test such as this. Personally, if I could teach an 8th grade student to pass this test I would feel like I did a great job.
Will Richardson suggested that the way today’s students learn is different when compared to adults who grew up without technology. I would reframe this belief and propose that human beings learn in the same way now as did our parents, grandparents, great grandparents etc. Children learn what their environment demands. The only thing that's changed is the stuff around us. We learn based on our surroundings.
As long as schools are brick and mortar facilities, where groups of similarly aged people come together in one room for a set period of time, social aspects of education will reign supreme over anything technology can offer. And why shouldn't they? Learning to interact with others in a real face-to-face environment is arguably the best attribute of public education. Schools fill roles other than student learning.
Richardson also said that the advances in technology make it a hugely challenging time to be an educator. I would suggest that may not be the case for many teachers. It's only challenging for those who strive to keep up with, and integrate, technology into their instruction practices. Does that make the teachers who don't take up this challenge worse teachers than those who do?
I sometimes wonder what teachers from a long time ago would think about modern educational constructs like authenticity, communication and collaboration, and student construction of their own knowledge. For example, this is an 8th grade test from 100 years ago. How did teachers get their 8th graders to pass a test this difficult? I’m sure students of yesteryear wondered "Why do I need to learn this?" The differences between then and now lie in the collective values held by parents, teachers, administrators, and communities.
Regarding the notion of authenticity, what’s genuine and realistic to one person may be meaningless to the next person. Can teachers really create authentic lessons for all students when they are strapped with standards based content and measured by their performance on standardized tests?
Do attributes like discipline and fortitude matter anymore? It seems like many people no longer value the skills, dispositions, and knowledge base required to pass a rigorous test such as this. Personally, if I could teach an 8th grade student to pass this test I would feel like I did a great job.