Third Reflection-Who Really Benifits from Technology in the Classroom?

This article was published this weekend in the LA Times..   http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20120205,0,639053.column  ..

Do you think that the integration of technology is really a racket to make money for business? Does movements to use more technology in classrooms have our students' best interests in mind?

Read the article and share your thoughts on it.. we will discuss it face to face next week..


 The article from the LA times really shed some light on some important issues that instructional designers, administrators, educational technology companies, and teachers need to reflect on and discuss. The author of the article says educational technology companies are looking for an easy way to make money and they don't have student learning at the forefront of their design. The author is also worried about the potential that the technology will not have a significant effect on student learning similar to the educational TV movements in the '60s and '70s. 

 What makes one piece of technology better than the other? What is the cornerstone to effective technology integration? Who can design a classroom that suits all the students individual educational needs? The answer to all these questions is an effective and authentic teacher. A good teacher is the only way a student's knowledge can grow positively within classroom instruction. The way a good teacher incorporates the technology into instruction is with lessons that are already exemplary in the first place. There is no substitute for a teacher's direct relationship with the students and their own classroom atmosphere. Technology is just a tool that if used effectively could boost an already effective teacher into a teacher that knows no bounds. 

Now the author, Michael Hiltzik, does have some shortcomings in his arguments within the article. He is unrelenting that schools could quite possibly spend $479 on an iPad for each student. What the author fails to account for is that schools already spend on upwards of $700 per student per year on textbooks. Hilzik also fails to account for the growing need of future employers to have students authentically trained and possess critical thinking skills as put fourth by the Common Core Standards. The opportunities for individual laptops or iPads in student hands effectively trains students for the real world. I don't expect doctors or lawyers to produce textbooks every time they are faced with a problem found within their profession. More often then not they are going to look toward the internet for a solution and current research or cases. The world is changing how it acquires its information. If we don't let our students change with the times then we will be selling them out.