In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/technology/technology-in-schools-faces-questions-on-value.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

This is an article discussing the caution we should take as we bring technology into the classroom.  The word itself--technology--has become a bit of a buzzword in the education realm.  Everything associated with that word seems to be positive, except for the results.  While I am a strong supporter of practical technology (such as I've been introduced to in this class), I do believe a lot of money is wasted on useless or unproven technology at the expense of teachers.

If we consider, for a second, that this class may very well be the one and only technology class we take at the collegiate level (as it is for me), the idea that we should somehow transfer into technological experts is sort of an absurdity.  We have a computer app teacher at the school I'll be teaching at, and she's excellent.  My expertise will be in teaching English.  While there will definitely be some incorporation of technology into my classroom (especially from the lessons I've done in this class), it will not be the center point of the educational experience itself in my classroom.  It is a tool, which is what this class promotes.  However, when technology becomes the focus, that's when we see learning decrease.

Widespread, we are seeing technology budgets for schools grow while the rest of the school budgets shrink.  We are seeing teachers being laid off while technological advances continue to increase.  The article insinuates the roots of our modern technological push date back to a 1997 meeting held by President Clinton with some of the top technological minds in the country.  At this meeting, it was urged that billions would be funded to increase technology in the classroom.  At the end of the meeting, however, the report's final sentence read: “The panel does not, however, recommend that the deployment of technology within America’s schools be deferred pending the completion of such research.”

Our problem, as a nation, is that we have yet to see any conclusive results of this research.  The idea of a technological push has good morals behind it for the most part, I believe.  It's sort of like No Child Left Behind in a way.  I like it when government focuses on education.  However, teachers are the ones who are experts on education, and they are rarely consulted in these matters.    

Unfortunately (and this is unfortunate), because of No Child Left Behind (etc.), we have limited ourselves to one single way of measuring the growth of our students' learning, and that is through the standardized test.  Nationwide, test scores have remained virtually the same since this program began.  The infusion of technology has done next to nothing to improve it.  But is that the focus?  Should that be the goal?  Karen Cator of the USDE doesn't seem to think so: “Test scores are the same, but look at all the other things students are doing: learning to use the Internet to research, learning to organize their work, learning to use professional writing tools, learning to collaborate with others.”

This is a valid point, although it might be a bit presumptuous to assume that the learning they are experiencing is the result of school and not prior knowledge.  After all, technology is increasing at a rate exponentially faster than at any other time in human history.  Most students in schools have now spend their entire lives with digital media.  

The debate rages on.