Oppenheimer's view of the use of technology in schools, and the "e-lusion" of the doors it opens for our students, is that "computers can, in select cases, be wonderfully useful in school. But over and over, as we've seen, high technology is steering youngsters away from the messy, fundamental challenges of the real world- and toward the hurried buzz and neat convenience of an unreal virtual world." (pg. 411) He fears that if our students stare at screens all day in school, as they do all evening with Facebook, text messaging and the television, they will not develop as imaginative, articulate people. They miss out on the human connection necessary to think critically, relate to others in a human way or, ultimately, be individuals.
As Oppenheimer warns of the threat of standardized testing, standardized thinking and standardized values, the educators, lawmakers and businesses involved with NETS-S are evaluating the framework for technology competency standards for schools. These standards are used by schools in most states to insure provision of age-appropriate technology fluency and its incorporation into the curriculum at all grade levels. Oppenheimer believes that, with our nation's schools having such varied qualities of funding, instruction and teacher salary, assuming that they should all aspire to teach to the same standards is absurd. He argues that we need to overcome the challenges of school culture before we try to tackle creating technological powerhouses. (pg. 357)
The Tech Tonic publication of the Alliance for Childhood seems to healthily balance the views of Oppenheimer and NETS-S. This group of educators designed a document to explain the dangers of an over emphasis on technology in the classroom and the tenet that real-world relationships come first. They state, "We remain convinced that, at the elementary school level and below, there is little evidence of lasting gains and much evidence of harm from the hours spent in front of screens. For us, the decision is an easy one: de-emphasize high-tech products and let children thrive and grow." (pg. 2) We should be teaching students to solve problems using technology instead of merely training them on machines. It is also important to prepare students to make healthy choices about tomorrow's technological moral and ethical issues. As technology is born of human choices, our students must learn to choose wisely how it will evolve.
I believe that the Tech Tonic view finds a reasonable and thoughtful way to teach with technology without losing the human element. I doubt that Oppenheimer and those at NETS-S will find it a suitable middle ground, as both sides are strongly pro and con. Perhaps it is necessary to have such differing views so that our nation's students can have varied school choices for their own educational needs and preferences.
Courtney, I really enjoyed reading your post- you raised some interestin points!
ReplyDeleteI also thought it was interesting how Tech Tonic describes the unhealthy side affects of too much technology. In particular, I found The Lancet study very interesting; where researchers followed 1,000 children from birth to young adulthood and found those who watched more TV were more likely to be obese, have high cholesterol, smoke, or have poor cardiovascular health. (p.19) And that's just the physical effects!
I agree with you Courtney. NETS-S and Oppenheimer will probably never agree, but that's actually a good thing! There are so many diverse learners, why not have diversified schools.
- Addie Curphey
Very thoughtful post. I especially like your emphasis on preparing students to make wise choices. I have to think some more about putting Oppenheimer in opposition to NETS-S, with the Tech Tonic authors in the middle. I think the current NETS-S are better than the original ones (Tech Tonic is very critical of the original ones). It would be interesting to get the authors into one room and hear what they might say to each other. In any case, I think the themes you point out are the key ones.
ReplyDeletejd