Overall, the concept of Kahn Academy is very isolating for students as they receive their “personalized learning.” What’s more, these types of learning platforms are digitized textbooks which prescribe to students what they will learn rather than embracing ISTE standards which ask the student to chart the course.

As someone who has worked in a charter school operated by an ophthalmologist who designed his school around how the brain/eyes function, I can tell you that it takes a certain something to keep a school functioning and money isn’t it.

Last year, I had the opportunity to visit Kent Innovation High (http://studentvoice.kentisd.org/theschool/aboutinnovationhigh/) near Grand Rapids and was blown away by it. This program is operated by the public district as a subsidiary of the Career Tech Center. They didn’t follow a 55-minute, 6-class day but instead had problem-based learning and combined classes so students could see the overlap. Everything they did was project based. Yes, they had technology at their fingertips as they needed it, but they had the choice to use it or not or in what capacity it was helpful. I don’t think the solution is charter schools; I think it would be better for schools that know how to function/run look for alternative scheduling options and ideas that can begin to incorporate changes like these into the curriculum. I just don’t see how it’s done well when we file kids through a 6-hour day from one class to the other and never allow them to see the connections.

on children. There is a piece of from this past fall titled, “The Digital Gap Between Rich and Poor Kids is Not What We Expected” that I use with my students as a conversation starter when we talk about the digital divide and more importantly (in my opinion) the digital use divide. So often tech is touted as a savior for those who have less when, as stated in the interview, this is not the case. And, while I know that the NY Times piece isn’t grounded in academic research, I do find the point on the privilege of choice to be powerful and thought-provoking.
https://nyti.ms/2JkjOuf

On the one hand, I agree that teachers need something to prove what our guts tell us about what students know and do not know. Administrators and other stakeholders seem to think a certain type of data is “it”, but it is busy work. So many of my coworkers fudge their eval. data so that they can jump through the hoop in order to get to the actual teaching and learning.

So good to hear that you are embracing the “Selwyn spirit” here as you think about the role of ed tech in your classroom.

In particular, as you think about a tool like Gimkit, what do you think you should be considering? Regardless of how we feel about school culture overall, and the ways in which “learning” is positioned as simply “remembering for the test,” do tools like this have value for the long term? In other words, as something more than a “review” for a test, what good might these types of tools be for self-directed learners?

In our personal lives, many of us can list many examples of how we use technology to connect and socialize, but this doesn’t happen often in the classroom (I’m speaking generally). Selwyn talked about this in his first chapter and Erickson illustrated this: students sitting quietly at their individual computers, not interacting. This is not exactly meeting ISTE’s student collaboration standard…but I’m going to play devil’s advocate here. As a teacher, I will say we fight against many different forces: student motivation (it’s DIFFICULT to get them to actually collaborate and change from the way things have always been done), administrative expectations (evaluations, what they expect to hear and see), parents and community, money and resources, time…plus, we’re expected to accomodate every type of learning style and individual preference, so wouldn’t working individually/independently, quietly be ideal for some of these students? Personally, I believe in balance and doing the best with what we have while continuing to push for more. Sometimes it’s okay for students to work independently. Sometimes it’s okay to work collaboratively. Sometimes it’s okay to be the creator/producer and sometimes it’s okay to be the consumer. There’s a lot of negativity about about the phenomenon of students obtaining knowledge from other sources (teachers, computers), but isn’t it true that in life we all obtain knowledge from other sources AND we create it too?

Clearly we need some sort of guidelines to ensure children in each state are being taught what’s needed. However, these sets of standards and curriculum reform (which is ongoing) will need parental and community support to thrive. Incorporating tech in the curriculum may be helpful, but it certainly won’t guarantee that its use will extend, enhance, or engage learning.