Most recent public comments by Katie Menko https://nowcomment.com/users/80234 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1883025 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1883025 This makes me think of what Ertmer stated in her interview with Davis (2017). She stated that district principals and leaders can best help with teachers really taking a higher-level approach with ed tech by sometimes just "getting out of the way" and letting teachers explore pedagogies and experiencing new opportunities. I think some of the barriers that teachers and support staff face in these endeavors need to be broken down in order for this higher-level impact of ed tech to occur. Fri, 15 May 2020 16:11:41 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1883007 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1883007 I think that community decisions would help to make ed tech implementations and projects more sustainable. The "charismatic champions" as leaders of tech projects certainly rang true in my previous school and district. I wonder what the best method is to have staff, teachers, and students involved. My previous district implemented many surveys for various stakeholders, but I'm not sure that those were always the most effective/had the greatest impact. Fri, 15 May 2020 16:05:15 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1878188 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1878188 I can connect with what you said about how the way he described his concerns with ed tech discourse is similar to the way a politician or administrator can talk around a point. I wonder about his intentions behind this. Does he share his thoughts in this way to avoid potential political/social challenges or disagreements? Or is he doing this to intentionally promote listeners to think deeper about the issues and come up with their own conclusions and beliefs? I'm not sure...just reflecting on this. I thought the phrases and words he used seemed to lead towards some purposeful ill-intentions of companies/politicians but, like you said, it was unclear so I couldn't be sure. Fri, 15 May 2020 20:32:36 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1873996 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1873996 I agree with the idea that slow, small-scale change is how the most permanent and successful adoption of classroom tech actually plays out. This reminded me of last week and Cuban's (1992) proposal that ed tech integration would look like the cautious optimist approach in schools. From my experience, this is certainly how ed tech was actually most often utilized in the classroom. I'm just not sure that this is how it should be. I do think ed tech needs to fit conceptually and contextually within a teacher's belief system and content, but I also think pushing the comfort boundaries a bit more could be a good thing. However, I've always had more of a "jump right in" and idealist mindset towards trying new classroom technologies so hopefully this course helping me look at things more critically and realistically. :) Fri, 15 May 2020 19:42:02 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1873952 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1873952 Some words and phrases that Selwyn (2017) often repeated/used that seemed connected were "distribution of power", "profit", "control", "private", "inequality", and "dominance". These linked together for me. I think Selwyn believes that the government, corporations, experts, and other entities can often be trying to sell ed tech to districts by offering a "one-size fits all" approach that doesn't truly meet specific local needs and contexts. I agree with Selwyn on this concept. I also think he is encouraging administrators and educators to be considerate of the true intentions of these entities. His thoughts shared in the video even seem to indicate that the way ed tech is talked about and promoted may be intentionally widening the inequality and gaps that already exist between districts and socio-economic statuses. Again, not sure if this is what he was insinuating but it really caused me to start thinking about ed tech differently as I've never considered it in such an ill-intentioned light before. I found it interesting that Culatta, on the other hand, placed the issue of inequality in a pretty positive light (Davis, 2017). He stressed that measures to combat inequity with ed tech were working well and that any remained inequities were due to "leadership issues" and not due to a lack of district funds/resources. Overall, a theme in the video that really resonated with me was the idea of unequal distribution. My research interests have been focused on how ed tech can be used to create more learning equality for all through assistive tech and UDL and now I'm thinking about the disparities that may exist in these arenas. Fri, 15 May 2020 21:13:45 -0400