Imagine a farmer giving up his John Deere tractor to go back to the hand plow. It’s much cheaper, and he knows how to use it (it’s been used for generations) and it gets the job done. At quick glance, the farm looks like it runs just fine. But watch the comparison with the farm a mile or so away that is still using the tractor and other technologically advanced tools and methods. Guess which farm will have more profits, more productivity, and more time and opportunity for research and development? Which farm will be able to compete globally and will maintain status in the farming community? And which farm will get left in the dust?
The danger in cutting technology in the schools is the same as the risk in returning to the use of a hand plow and trying to compete against tractors. Education will take steps backward. The old ways may save money, but they waste time and squelch progress.
Some policymakers are making compromises, trying to straddle both worlds. They see the value of technology and do not want to eliminate it entirely, so they trim it back severely, like the farmer using his tractor only once a year. These decision makers in the educational systems are cutting the number of instructional technology integrators in the schools to trim the budgets, and they’re rationalizing that teachers should be able to use the technology without the specialists’ help. But a farmer can’t learn how to use a tractor immediately, nor can he learn how to farm efficiently by having a tractor parked in the barn.
Educational technology is not something you learn once and never need to learn again. It is an ongoing, continually evolving progression of skills and methods.
Policymakers who sacrifice technology integrators to reduce or remove employees from the school systems cling to misguided beliefs. While they may admit or give voice to the philosophy that technology is important to emphasize 21st Century skills, for example, they may believe that integrators are “extra support” and should be phased out as teachers learn how to incorporate technology into their lessons themselves.
School boards and superintendents are often naively unaware of the scope, depth, and complexity of instructional technology — and the explosive speed and volume at which new applications are developed and introduced. They may not consider or understand the learning curve, including the profundity of pedagogy and instructional design that must go into the implementation of these tools to be successful. Nor do they comprehend the continual support that is required before teachers can become independent users, not to mention keeping up with the research and mastery of the rapid upgrades and new introduction of software applications.
Many instructional technology integrators earn credentials through graduate-level coursework that specifically teaches the value and the means of assessing, choosing, and integrating technology to supplement or deliver instruction. These additional degrees or certifications are earned in addition to professional teaching credentials. If policymakers think teachers can take all of that specialized knowledge on themselves, develop expertise & skill in the use of various software applications, and keep up with the onslaught of new developments without support (in addition to keeping up with the demands of their classroom), they are (1) overlooking the available wealth of expertise, insight, and skill represented by instructional technologists, (2) undermining their specialized value, and (2) adding overwhelming extra helpings to teachers’ plates without fair compensation in money, time, and supportive resources.
I wonder if teachers realize the implications of these cuts — that they are expected to integrate technology without any help or, at best, with reduced help? Perhaps teachers think they’re off the hook and they aren’t required to use technology because of the reduced number of integrators, but most school boards and superintendents still expect teachers to use technology — only now they expect teachers to be savvy enough to use it without help. This is worth serious consideration and review. Are teachers really ready to do this?
Have most teachers integrated technology without help yet? Not in my experience. There are some teachers who are rocking the technology world with their classroom integrations without any help — but these are exceptions to the rule. Most teachers simply aren’t ready, and the world of technology bewilders, overloads, and distracts them as they expend their professional energy on their classroom responsibilities.
… I think they’re going to miss us when we’re gone.
John Deere photo by Chris Inside (on flickr); used with permission
This blog expresses the personal opinions of the author and is not affiliated
with nor representative of any company, employer, or other entity.
Posted on March 7th, 2009 by Sharon Elin
Filed under: Uncategorized
Nicely stated. The analogy of the tractor and hand plow is fitting. Right now, the entire educational system is in limbo between how we should be doing things and how we are doing things. In hindsight, all will realize the value of supporting teachers and providing professional development opportunities for teachers because those opportunities directly impact each child in that classroom. We cannot truly compete globally until all on board start looking ahead instead of looking behind and basing decisions on the traditional modes of education. I think you’re right- They will miss you when you’re gone!
“In limbo” is right, Teri! I think the educational system is suffering from growing pains and, like an adolescent, doesn’t know whether to regress or move forward and reacts to the conflicting choices by either acting out or shutting down.
The classroom model has been in effect for so long and technology is so new and rapidly-advancing that the educational system can’t get its footing to brace itself for change. I think in some ways, we’ve barreled in like techno-bulls expecting instant acceptance, and now we’re insulted by being rebuffed.
They will, indeed, miss us when we’re gone, and I agree with you that they will eventually realize our worth and importance, but we will need to be patient and persistent. We need to continue talking to each other, but we also need to reach out more to educators who DON’T use technology to convince them that instructional technology is an effective way to engage 21st Century Learners. Too many old-school educators hang onto the past because they simply don’t see the point in changing — or they’re scared to change. We need to push (gently) to insist on progress rather than remaining stagnant.
Sharon,
This blog is an absolute bulls-eye when it comes to BOEs and Superintendents’ approaches to budget crunches. Technology is typically one of the first stops because of how “it should be integrated”. Well, if the teachers and admin don’t understand how then there is no integration. It is the same scenerio when it comes to mathematics. If there is no math teacher, there is not math taught. Thus, students are left to survive on their own.
I have been a Director of Technology in the past. Part of the reason I left that position for a different district was due to this same belief. They wanted the moon for the amount of money we can find on the streets along with there only being 2 people to support, invision, and integrate. They cut our budget in half one year, then in half once again the following year, and finally froze it the third year. Thus, I was trying to keep 10 yr old desktops going with Windows 98. They still have teachers using laptops that are 6 years old. The thing with that issue is that I left them the rotation and funds to complete the cycle. Instead they permit my replacement to go and spend the money on Blackberry phones for all admin and Mac Book Pros for himself and a fix/repair newby.
Sorry for the soap box but I am an extreme believer in integration and turning up the “HEAT” (Higher order thinking, Engagement, Authentic learning, Technology) in the classroom.
God Bless!
We know that education is due for some major changes. Some involves technology, some methods. But the budget concerns rule every decision. So we stay with the same old thing: principal, teacher, students. Resource people like librarian/media center directors, technology specialists, reading specialists are deemed optional. A few clerks, a few security people and some janitors. Such makes a modern school. Shame.
[...] computer hardware and networks. Related posts: “Scapegoats and White Elephants” “John Deere vs. a Hand Plow” Photo of overhead projectors courtesy of Wesley Fryer, from http://www.speedofcreativity.org/ Photo [...]