EDU 807 - Intro to Selwyn - Group 01
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
As we begin our semester, we jump into the ideas of Neil Selwyn, a professor in the Faculty of Education, Monash University. The following resources are imported from:
- Selwyn, N. (2017). What We Talk About When We Talk About EdTech. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhG7tsYTW2c
- Selwyn, N. (2019, January). Teachers and technology: Time to get serious. Retrieved from Impact.chartered.college website: https://impact.chartered.college/article/editorial-education-technology/
Discussion Activity
As you listen to his talk and read his article, consider the following questions built from the 4A's protocol:
-
What Assumptions does Selwyn hold about educational technology?
- What does he believe about educators? Students? Corporations? Government?
- What does he believe about ideas of power, inequality, democracy, the common good and other ways that ed tech is talked about?
-
What do you Agree with in Selwyn's speech/writing?
- As you consider the principles from the video and the article, which ones resonate most for you? How does he describe educational technology in ways that make sense to you and the ways that you want to be critical of ed tech?
-
What do you want to Argue with in Selwyn's speech/writing?
- As you consider the principles from the video and the article, which ones do you disagree with? Are there points that you disagree with?
-
What parts of Selwyn's speech/writing do you want to Aspire to (or Act upon)?
- Based on what Selwyn describes here, what key themes resonate with you and may encourage you to take action in your EDU 807 work?
Please offer at least one comment on the video and one comment on the text to begin the conversation. Then, reply to each of your classmates' initial comments by asking questions, making connections, or sharing follow-up ideas that may push their thinking.
But he goes on to say these characteristics of discourses surrounding ed. tech. seem to be at odds with public education as a public good and not something to be privatized and profited from. I agree with Selwyn here.
I agree. Some keys I took away from this were that there are definitely struggles in ed tech. Mostly because of different perspectives as well as different stake holders. His statement, Ed tech is bogged down in hyperbole and hubris" hit home for me. It is like when someone goes to a conference or workshop and everyone stops the initiatives they implemented to focus onto new thing that was brought in.
Another was when he said Ed tech issues are political questions. Words repeated that struck a cord with my comments are : struggle, intense conflict, control, resistance, and power. All things that are challenges to democracy and the common good…
Teachers and technology: Time to get serious
Although classroom computers have been with us since the 1970s, schools have only recently become truly ‘digital’. Now, every school seems full of digital devices and display screens. Anything that can be digitised is stored online. Lessons are live-streamed, resources are downloadable and communication takes place through apps and email. Behind the scenes, schools maintain their own servers, host school-wide WiFi and run complex management systems. In contrast to even a few years ago, today’s schools depend upon substantial amounts of digital technology.
This is not to say that technology use in education is now straightforward. If anything, digital technology is more of a headache for teachers than ever. On the one hand, schools are bombarded with claims from software vendors and technology enthusiasts about the power of various new technologies to transform what goes on in the classroom. On the other hand, the impacts of technology use on teaching and learning remain uncertain. Andreas Schleicher – the OECD’s director of education – caused some upset in 2015 when suggesting that ICT has negligible impact on classrooms. Yet he was simply voicing what many teachers have long known: good technology use in education is very tricky to pin down.
At the same time, it could be argued that the technologies featuring most prominently in teachers’ professional lives have little to do with teaching and learning at all. Instead, it often feels that digital technology is primarily a managerial tool for keeping tight control over what goes on in the classroom. Digital technology is certainly a key part of school data-gathering and teacher monitoring, as well as a means of extending schoolwork long into evenings, weekends and holiday time. While IT firms continue to make millions of pounds from selling their products to schools, teachers could be forgiven for never wanting to switch on a laptop again. We have come a long way from optimistic endorsements of classroom computers as ‘the teacher’s friend’.
I have to say I struggle with this a little bit as I think about Cuban last week and teacher autonomy. As a teacher that is now paperless, I put some serious effort into what I use and how it works with my curriculum and gathering data of student success. I also will drop technology in a heartbeat if it is not doing what I need it to do in helping my students learn or show evidence of their learning. When tech does that, it is my friend. When it doesn’t It’s got to go. However, I know that I may be in the minority of teachers that are blessed in having that kind of autonomy.
I agree. If something isn’t working we need to re-evaluate, revise or try something else.
This issue of Impact therefore coincides with the growing realisation that everyone in education needs to get serious about how technology is used in schools. We are no longer in the ‘booster’ decades of the 1990s and 2000s, when it was fashionable to enthuse about anything ‘cyber’ or ‘virtual’. Instead, as we enter the 2020s, people are becoming decidedly wary of digital technology. Incidents such as Cambridge Analytica and the Edward Snowden NSA revelations have prompted notable pushbacks against the use of technology in schools. Parents are increasingly unhappy with purchasing £1,000 laptops for their children. Politicians are calling for bans on smartphones in classrooms. Teaching unions are challenging the influence that ‘big tech’ companies such as Google have over public schooling. Civil rights organisations are raising legal and ethical objections to the increased use of data and analytics. While no one is arguing that we should get rid of computers completely from schools, there is growing suspicion of the technological ‘opportunities’ that are being pushed onto education.
Could this all simply be because we did what we usually do? We jumped on the bandwagon and did not think through the impact this would have on students? the repercussions of its usage? Repercussions of not having everyone at the discussion/decision table when purchasing decisions are made?
Against this background, teachers face a tough task when it comes to making sense of technology. There are still many benefits to be gained from digital technology, but this is an area that requires careful attention. Unfortunately, there are no quick or easy answers to ‘what works’. Instead, perhaps the most helpful thing to do at this point is to offer seven brief bits of advice for any teacher wanting to make sense of the technologies that are featured in this issue. In no particular order…
#1.
Be clear what you want to achieve
The implementation of digital technology in schools often fails where there is no genuine purpose for its use.
While this might sound obvious, many schools continue to purchase the latest devices and apps simply because they ‘look cool’, or because other schools are buying them.
Instead, technology implementation works best when teachers start by identifying a ‘real-world’ problem.
Only then will they begin to think through which specific technologies might offer an appropriate way of addressing that problem… or perhaps whether any technology is required at all.
The actual device or software package should be the final piece of the process, not its starting point.
#2.
Set appropriate expectations
It certainly helps to have modest expectations of what might be achieved through the use of any device or application.
On one hand, educational technology has long suffered from being an area beset with hype and grand ambitions.
It is still common to hear people talk about digital technology ‘transforming’ teaching, boosting engagement or fostering ‘21st-century skills’.
These claims are so vague as to be meaningless – setting the technology-using teacher up to fail before they have even begun.
On the other hand, technology use can also suffer from being attached to overly specific ambitions.
Even if such changes do occur, it is impossible to say whether the use of a particular app was associated with a two-per-cent increase in graduation rates.
Schools are complex ‘ecosystems’, where there are many confounding factors behind why something happens (or does not happen).
Instead, it helps to set broad goals and exhortative targets that relate to appropriate areas of classroom practice.
Digital technology might reasonably be expected to give students more convenient opportunities to access curriculum materials, but it would be foolhardy to expect technology to somehow ‘cause’ a 10-point grade improvement over a semester.
#3.
Aim for small-scale change
Often, the best way to encourage the take-up of technology throughout any school is to aim for ‘low-hanging fruit’.
Most technology adoption in schools is gradual, slow-burning and aligned with established ways of doing things.
As such, the digital technologies that take hold in schools tend to be those that fit comfortably with how teachers and students are accustomed to doing things.
For example, the use of interactive whiteboards follows neatly on from chalkboards.
Similarly, the use of digital textbooks follows on from paper books.
These technologies support practices that teachers, schools and students feel familiar and safe with.
Despite the grand talk of technology transformation, revolution and reinvention, thinking small and keeping things simple can often be the best way to encourage lasting technology adoption within a school.
Jessie, I think that this is describing the school that has take baby steps based on their faculty and student population. When they get past this then they can grow. All of these things are in my school and I still have teachers that fight them tooth and nail. Refusing to digitize worksheets even as a start. Change has to start somewhere. The key is not to stay here.
I think that setting “appropriate expectations” is wise and I agree with his suggestion. My critique was more along the apparent discord between the ed. tech. he espouses (i.e., things to reinforce what is currently done) and his critiques of education. But I could be misinterpreting Selwyn. Maybe he doesn’t take issue with the education system but rather ed. tech.
Agreed! I have seen this reservation in my institution as well. An instructor will try something with technology and if it doesn’t work will write off tech altogether. There seems to be so much fear adn disappointment about the critique that educational technology didn’t live up to its promise. Maybe one way of releasing that fear is to be the change, show instructors how one re-evaluates the use of technology when one plan doesn’t work instead of dismissing the prospect entirely.
My thoughts on this differ a bit. To me it seems like Selwyn is stating that we need to think more carefully about the best or most appropriate way to deliver the content. Sometimes using technology isn’t the best option and sometimes is changes the way we teach the content altogether. Understanding technology as a pedagogical tool means that we consider objectively whether tech is the best way for students to learn and admit when it is not. Touching on Jesse’s point regarding the transformative power of technology, perhaps tech would be more transformative if it is used in the right context. This is how I interpret this passage.
I agree with you Ana. Technology is transformative. They key to the transformation is context. I see both perspectives in this text. I also see in your reply something else. Educators are expected to use tech or use wisdom when using tech and yet have not been provided the training to discern effective tech. How many times have educators chosen a tool and found not only did it work as expected but it did not support student outcomes? Effective research of tool just like in instruction is important for there to be a transformative change in ed tech.
#4.
Pay attention to the ‘bigger picture’
Everything that takes place in school is influenced by a variety of people, processes and other pressures.
In this sense, it is important to think through how any technology use will ‘fit’ with the whole-school context.
This includes familiar issues such as lack of time and resourcing.
It also includes a range of within-school issues that do not usually get talked about when it comes to technology use – from the physical layout of classrooms and school buildings, to staffroom micro-politics.
Similarly, technology can be influenced by a range of outside-school factors – from National Curriculum requirements through to local neighbourhood characteristics.
This means that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ way of getting technology to work.
Successful technology use requires a lot of planning for the specific contexts and circumstances of your own school.
#5.
Think about unintended consequences
Even if you are clear what you want to achieve with technology, it is important to give some thought to what other consequences might also result.
Using any technology in the classroom might have unexpected implications for pedagogy, student behaviour and group dynamics.
At the same time, technology use also raises issues that stretch well beyond the classroom.
For example, what data is being generated by the software you are using and where does it go?
Is data being sold to third parties, or used by school authorities to measure and monitor performance?
Perhaps most important are concerns relating to fairness and equity.
Research shows that technology use tends to benefit particular students over others – usually those who are already most advantaged (the so-called ‘Matthew Effect’).
So, which students are likely to gain most from your use of technology, and who else might actually suffer?
In the words of the media critic Neil Postman, the most important considerations are not questions of what technology will do, but questions of what technology will undo.
I think he makes a great point here too. Often in an effort to provide low-cost options to students, we opt for free tools. However, I can’t help but think of your comment. Facebook isn’t free. Most teachers consider a few things when trying new applications. Is the app or program is it easy to use? Will it fulfill the course objective? Will students buy-in? If we consider only these questions perhaps we don’t extend the research to consider who might be collecting data on our students. Even if we were more conscientious, would information about who is collecting data be available. This is a perspective I admittedly hadn’t considered before. However, like you, I will be more thoughtful in the future.
I agree Facebook isn’t free. You pay the price with unwanted sponsored suggested ads! Anyway, you are right these are all questions teachers that use tech ask. I would challenge us all to read the fine print ( EULA) before pressing agree and to get to the bottom of the info. If we can read food labels for our health and the FDA forces industry to make labels readable, why can’t that be done for apps and ed tech tools?
This is so true. In the age of free apps for teachers it is definitely something we must consider.
#6.
Technology use is a collective concern
There is a longstanding tendency for successful school technology projects to be those driven by ‘charismatic champions’.
The introduction of new technologies into school is understandably reliant on the expertise and energy of committed individuals – from the enthusiastic IT-using teachers who drag colleagues into projects, to the technicians that keep everything running on a shoestring.
The trouble with this approach is that once these individuals move on, then the impetus for technology use often moves with them.
Instead, sustained technology use is best achieved by making digital technology a collective, communal and shared concern.
Rather than one person pushing things through, technology works best when teachers work together – talking with each other and getting the whole school community on board in working out what to do.
The days are of education technology being a personal passion project for just a few teachers are over.
Developing technology use should be a collective responsibility for all staff, students and parents.
In number six I think we can identity where Selwyn is making an assumption about those who are working in educational technology. In this passage Selwyn makes the assumption that those who work with and in educational technology are in the minority. While his assessment may be true, we often take for granted the number of colleagues who are already trying or using technology in their classes. We assume those with a fully built out courses, enthusiastic about IT are only those who are thrown into tech enhanced projects. Maybe this one person isn’t the only that is pushing things through?
Are you saying that there may be more to this meaning that it is not always be the tech savvy teacher but an administrator, “tech guy” that is orchestrating the push for a specific technology for example?
Absolutely! Sometimes it is the administrator, the IT specialist, the student, the advisors who is advocating for the way technology can benefit education. Ultimately, I think I added this comment to emphasize the fact that as educational technologists we are not alone. It might be helpful to gather our community in our individual institutions wherever they may be and work together.
This sounds very much like the community of practice theory but with all stakeholders involved. It will only work if we have everyone’s buy-in and constant contributions and support.
I see what Selwyn is saying and I don’t have any experience trying to get a community behind school technology. Yet, I think the ‘charismatic champion’ can be a great help. No, you don’t want this person doing everything nor leaving the community behind but it seems to me that having some folks demonstrate what is possible could be a strong catalyst to getting a community moving and understanding options.
#7.
Beware of over-confident ‘experts’
Educational technology is an area that is fuelled by bold predictions, strong assertions and promises of improved teaching and learning.
There are many people who make a good living from telling teachers what technology can do for them.
Unfortunately, this is an area where no one can be completely certain of what will happen.
As mentioned previously, every school is a locally specific context.
What works in one school might not be applicable to another.
It is nigh-on impossible for researchers to ‘prove’ that education technology leads to particular gains, improvements and outcomes.
Anyone who is trying to tell you otherwise is either being cavalier with the facts, or else trying to sell you something.
The most useful education technology knowledge does not come from globe-trotting ‘gurus’, keynote speakers and product evangelists.
Instead, the best technology advice can often come from simply trying things out for yourself and/or speaking with colleagues working in similar situations and circumstances.
There is still a lot to be said for teachers drawing on local knowledge and trusting their own judgement.
I couldn’t have said it better myself! I think however, that the “Ed Tech Salesman” or Ed Tech Evangelist" does provide the local something to look at , think about, and consider when it comes to their immediate classroom, colleagues and school though.
Conclusions
Set against the hype that usually surrounds education and technology, these low-key suggestions might not seem particularly exciting or inspirational.
Yet the actual implementation of digital technology in schools is rarely that exciting or spectacular.
Neither is school technology simply a ‘technical’ issue of what new device to buy next, or which app to get your class to download.
Instead, school technology is a ‘socio-technical’ issue – relating to the social, cultural and political aspects of people and schools, alongside the technical aspects of organisational structure and processes.
In this sense, getting the best from digital technology involves thinking about the specific contexts of your school, and how you can work with (and sometimes work around) them.
This all points to the need to approach technology use in schools in a manner that is realistic rather than idealistic. This involves being questioning, objective, discerning, disinterested and dispassionate when it come to the claims being made about specific technologies. This involves being curious about the problems – as well as potential – of new technologies. Above all, this involves seeing digital technology as something that requires plenty of forethought and collaboration with others around you.
Digital technology undoubtedly involves more (rather than less) thought and effort for teachers. Of course, there are plenty of benefits to be had from engaging with the vast variety of digital opportunities that are now available to schools. Yet perhaps it is most fruitful to always view digital technology as a choice. Digital technology is not something that teachers have to adapt to in the best way they can. Instead, digital technology should be something that you engage with on your own terms, to achieve your own goals and to address your own needs. Used appropriately, digital technology can be a powerful addition to any teacher’s repertoire. I hope that these articles provide you with plenty of food for thought.
The last part of this paragraph is so important! However, if we do not have discourse and help teachers to see this point this cannot happen in every classroom.
This is a good reminder and perhaps something we need in terms of educating the powers that be. Courses of quality take time to develop and that includes online or blended courses. Maybe instructors need more time and compensation to build awesome classes.
I agree Ana. More time for the building of courses as well as effective tech if it is to be used and how.
Remember: Please offer at least one comment on the video and one comment on the text to begin the conversation.
General Document Comments 0
icons on the left to see existing comments.
0 archived comments