jlearn2.0

“[T]hese instruments are not uncommon, but are little resorted to by the teacher.”
(Observations on the chalkboard, 1840)

In the early 1800’s a new technology emerged which, along with changes in society, would radically help alter the way in which education was designed. It was used in schools, colleges, and military institutions like West Point. This tool was instrumental as a presentation and demonstration tool. It helped to support learning; engaged students in interactive learning; facilitated the organization of class work; and supported new learning strategies that took advantage of visual tools such as text and graphics. Learning was more easily accessed by the entire class and class time could be used more efficiently through whole group instruction by engaging the entire class at once, rather than focusing on only a few students at a time. A sense of community was created through the sharing and presentation of student work.

Its integration into common educational use was not immediate. It took time and circumstances for educators to realize its potential. Its adaptation into normative teaching practice was made through incremental changes that in turn reflected shifts in educational philosophy and vision, architecture and learning culture. Training manuals were developed with step-by-step guidelines, and staff development was provided in schools of education. Eventually, the technology became so widespread and normative that it was seamlessly integrated into the architecture of most classrooms.

This technology, the chalkboard, maintains its place in traditional educational settings. The chalkboard was notable for its ease of use, low technical and maintenance requirements, and relatively low cost. Today, in addition to the familiar low-tech chalkboard, there are updated electronic versions of interactive whiteboards that allow users to digitally manipulate data (literally and figuratively), store it, and make it available to download, print, or email to the class.

It is worth remembering that it takes time, vision, resources, and training for educational technologies to develop.
___
Sources:
Dockterman, David A. Great Teaching in the One Computer Classroom. Watertown, MA: Tom Snyder Productions, 1998.
Dockterman, David A. Tools for Teachers: An Historical Analysis of Classroom Technology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, 1998.

The Lippman Kanfer Institute is an action-oriented think tank for innovation in Jewish learning and engagement. It recently developed a wiki through which to disseminate its work and to elicit feedback. The Institute’s first major initiative is “Redesigning Jewish Education for the 21st Century,” an opportunity to map out an agenda and strategy for ensuring that Jewish education is maximally effective and relevant in the new century. Among the issues raised are how new media can be employed for Jewish education and change, and how the new media culture provides new perspectives on Jewish learning.

More information about this project can be found on the wiki. To participate, contact Dr. Jonathan Woocher, Director, Lippman Kanfer Institute. The Lippman Kanfer Institute is affiliated with JESNA.

Below are few ideas to consider when planning for the introduction of a technology-based innovation in educational settings.

Regarding Learners or Constituents:

• In what ways can this technological innovation enrich the learning experience for current learners or constituents?
• Which of the current learners or constituents might be most receptive to this technological innovation? Which of them might be least receptive to this technological innovation? Will this technological innovation turn away current learners? What additional supports or scaffolding might they need to become more successful learners?
• How might this technological innovation help reach additional or new learners or constituents?

Regarding the Institution or sponsoring organization:

• What is the organization’s vision for learning? What does the cultural landscape look like, especially regarding change and the implementation of new ideas?
• How does the use of the technological innovation fit with the purpose of the sponsoring institution or organization and further its goals?
• How does its use fit with the culture of the institution?
• How receptive will the current faculty, staff, and constituents be? How might this technological innovation attract new faculty, staff, and constituent members?
• What is needed to prepare stakeholders to utilize the technological innovation?
• What type of expertise is needed either in the institution or on a consultative basis to introduce and maintain this technological innovation? Who on staff already has some of the needed expertise? How can staff assist colleagues in adapting to this change (staff-to-staff professional development; mentoring; buddy system; student assisted professional development for the staff, etc.)
• What types of technical supports and other infrastructures are necessary to ensure success?
• What costs are involved, including start-up costs and ongoing maintenance?
• What will success look like and how will it be assessed? What types of benchmarks will be put in place to help identify successes and challenges?
• How will the organization use assessments and evaluations to further its vision and implementation?

What would you add to the list based on your experiences?

Marc Prensky offers an interesting perspective in his article, “Adopt and Adapt: 21st Century Schools Need 21st Century Technology,” published Edutopia, December 2005. He reviews the typical four-step process of technology adoption in schools:

1. Dabbling
2. Doing old things in old ways
3. Doing old things in new ways
4. Doing new things in new ways

Prensky concludes that until recently, schools have been dabbling, and for the most part, they are still doing old things in old ways, even though the tools may have changed. He reflects on the technical (one-to-one computing) and sociological (”digital natives,” “digital immigrants,” the conservative nature of schools) challenges to the kind of educational transformation could occur if schools were able to do new things in new ways.

Does his article ring true to your experiences? What are some examples in your school or organization?

A recent posting on the jlearn2.0 wiki noted the difficulty of introducing the use of a new technology, in this case, a wiki. In theory, the use of the wiki would seem to be a natural tool for collaboration on a project by colleagues who are already familiar with one another but who are geographically dispersed. In reality, there can be great challenges in introducing and implementing any kind of change, no matter how seemingly slight, even under the best of circumstances.

What are some of the challenges you have come across? How have you addressed them?