Technology Embedded Pedagogy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CU5wV49y9KI

This post was originally posted on  Figuring It Out  by J.  Bevacqua

I get a little frustrated when I  hear comments that continually relegate the use of technology in education as something supplemental to teaching learning.  I suppose videos like the one above don’t help this situation – although the idea of “Learning empowered by technology” makes me feel better.

Nonetheless, I wonder when we will stop seeing “technology” as an “add on” to sound teaching pedagogy.

If we agree that we live in a technology and information rich time, then schools, as places of learning and teachers as agents of learning, need to shift their respective culture and mindset surrounding technology.

The “how” of teaching needs to be embedded, when required and necessary, with technology (it is appropriate and necessary to NOT use technology at times)

My twitter stream is full of #edtech tools and suggestions.  But without the necessary pedagogical immersion, we will continue to relegate technology diflucan latin america to the equivalent of the annual field trip.

A  few weeks ago I came across a tweet by Bill Ferriter @plugusin where wrote

Crappy #edtech choices= schools start by asking, “What do we want to BUY?” instead of, “What do we want kids to DO?”

Brilliant!  Starting with what students are “doing” with technology is rooted in pedagogy.

So how do we get to a place where technology is embedded within the pedagogical repertoire of teachers?

Here are some things that have worked and things that have failed for us:

What’s worked

  • Making the case for a technology embedded pedagogy, supporting teachers with time and resources to learn buy cialis online no prescription while at the same time respecting a teachers right to minimal intrusion when it comes professional learning.

What’s NOT worked

What’s worked

  • When teachers think about how technology can assist with specific teaching strategies such as: Identifying similarities and differences, Summarizing, note taking and creating, Homework and practice, Cooperative learning, Setting objectives and providing feedback, Generating and testing hypotheses, Cues, questions, and advance organizers.

What’s NOT worked

  • Using technology only to present material lecture style

Whats Worked

  • Explaining and demonstrating the pedagogical rationale for technology with vivid examples of success.

What’s NOT worked

  • Showing specific tech tools without the explaining its purpose or rationale

What’s Worked

  • Being patient and not forcing it down peoples throats.

What’s NOT Worked

  • Buying the same technology for everyone at the same time

What’s Worked

  • Creating the conditions for a technology appetite among teachers and having teachers “knock down my door” with personalized technology requests.

What’s NOT Worked

  • Buying the same tool or gadget without the proper buy-in – only to have those gadgets either underutilized or not used at all.

What’s Worked

  • Giving teachers time and resources to learn among themselves for themselves.  Creating a climate of “expertise and experimentation” on staff.

What’s NOT worked

  • One day, one size fits all workshops

What’s Worked

  • Being OK when things go wrong

What’s NOT worked

  • Over reacting when things don’t go right

As we continue to find ways to make learning more relevant and engaging for our students, I hope that we will move away for seeing technology as a mere tool or add on – but an embedded pedagogical reality.

41 comments for “Technology Embedded Pedagogy

  1. December 29, 2012 at 10:16 am

    Thank you for this blog post. It is a guide to follow when presenting supplemental learning materials to principals and teachers. As a retired art educator I am hoping to bring a developed art education curriculum to common core subject matter to integrate art education into the classroom. Finding the useful critiques on what works and what does not is hard to find. Art education has been pushed out of the schools relegated to afterschool enrichment in many settings around the country. My challenge is how to convince educators that there is away to bring drawing and critical thinking skills to the visual learners within the educational system. Thanks for your insights, I follow your blog and hope to repost your article. Best regards for the New Year. Elaine Cimino

  2. Sid de Haan
    December 29, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    “Brilliant! Starting with what students are “doing” with technology is rooted in pedagogy.”

    Is it rooted in pedagogy or is it rooted in curriculum? I am always somewhat leary of an approach to instruction that begins with planning “activities” rather than beginning with learner outcomes. In Alberta, our learner outcomes begin with “Students will…” (an active stem) and the outcomes themselves contain verbs (actions) that further clarify what students are to do. By focussing on the Program of Studies we position ourselves as planners to ensure that what we are not engineering busy work, which I think is very important considering how challenging it can be for teachers to address the surpluss of outcomes contained in the Alberta curriculum. Meaningfull integration is critical, but planning for it must begin with the Program of Studies.

  3. Chuck Lawson
    December 29, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    I really like the concept of creating the conditions for a technology appetite among teachers. This is a a system where teachers are responsible professionals who want to learn rather than a system of accountability where teachers are forced to learn about technology. I believe creating a system where teachers are responsible learners who are eager to push their own learning is a key component of Finland’s successful education system. Thanks for the great post, Johnny.

  4. January 1, 2013 at 4:34 am

    Two things have really helped our teachers:
    1. Modelling the use of tech in faculty meetings. At the end of the meeting, brainstorm how the technology might be used in the classroom.
    2. Release time for teachers to watch other teachers. Once the see the connection to learning, the tech is no longer an add-on.

  5. May 31, 2013 at 7:19 pm

    Technology used to automate/operate school functions frees up staff to focus on education and less on management.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *