Most recent public comments by Sarah Manacek https://nowcomment.com/users/80347 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883140 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883140 Wendy, My Dean has used this approach, and my experience with assisting with integrating iPads has supported your comment. When I assist schools with integrating iPads, I will give them an example of various lessons in different iWork apps. Then I will talk with teachers about their vision for redesigning just one of their lessons and give them ideas for which app to use. I think once teachers can feel comfortable with one tool at a time, it is much less overwhelming. Focusing on the pedagogy of the tool is also important so teachers understanding WHY a tool is useful as a whole rather than just for a particular lesson. Fri, 15 May 2020 16:47:04 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883120 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883120 I totally agree that ICT has improved as a whole. I think big tech companies have really stepped up with offering easy to use and robust remote communication tools. I find that I use FaceTime, Zoom, or GoToMeeting with students often. I also appreciate Microsoft Teams instead of email when working synchronously as a team. It helps with the flow of conversations over scrolling through millions of email threads. Fri, 15 May 2020 16:42:58 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883119 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883119 A thought I had about how big tech companies are addressing accessibility is by offering easy opportunities for file conversion, and the ability of their applications to work via on the cloud. For example, if you have an iCloud account, you can log into a public PC computer at the library, use any browser to log into iCloud, and use all of the iWork applications in the browser. Another example is the ability to export iWork files (Keynote for example) as Microsoft files. I think if EdTech companies are truly dedicated to education as a guiding value, they would find a way to prioritize accessibility and cohesive functioning no matter the device. Fri, 15 May 2020 16:39:34 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883058 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1883058 I had a feeling you would say that ;) Fri, 15 May 2020 16:25:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1879623 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1879623 Hi Wendy, I had a similar reaction when I read this paragraph. My experience has been that the institution chooses technology, or a brand of technology (I'm thinking Microsoft vs Apple) based on a technology strategic plan. I'm not sure if educators always have the luxury of choosing to engage or not. I think this is especially true for higher education institutions teaching practical professions. For example, the nursing profession has chosen to conduct a lot of their licensing tests online, and many products for training nurses require edtech. Functioning as a nurse today requires learners to be tech-savvy; it would be a disservice to these learners if we did not train them using computers and edtech tools. Additionally, the American Association of Colleges of Nursing recently updated their standards to include technology as a fundamental piece to nursing education. Thu, 14 May 2020 12:05:40 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878107 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878107 I agree with this point. When considering an educational tool, whether it technology or otherwise, it is always important to weigh the consequences of using the tool or approach. Asking colleagues for their opinion of whether or not the tools or activity meets course learning objectives is where I start. Wed, 13 May 2020 15:17:13 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878090 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878090 I understand what Selwyn is saying here, as I have witnessed tech integration success at my university this way. I began my career at Norwich the same year the university began a 1:1 iPad program. I often heard my Dean discussing "low-hanging fruit" and getting faculty buy-in by helping them find their "one best thing." Often this "one best thing" is a simple substitution for what teachers were already doing, such as in the paper book to digital book example. My argument against this point is: how will education evolve harmoniously with EdTech if all we ever do is focus on substitution? This connects back to pushing educators to adjust their philosophy of teaching to include technology. I think of the SAMR model here- integrating EdTech in the most effective way requires a shift in cultural thinking about what teaching IS. Here is a link to the SAMR model: https://www.schoology.com/blog/samr-model-practical-guide-edtech-integration This brings me back to last week's reading by Cuban (1992). My mind is in the "technophile's dream" but Selwyn seems to be pushing for somewhere between the "preservationist's scenario" and "the cautious optimist's scenario." Cuban, L. (1992). Computers meet classroom; classroom wins. Education Week, 12(10), 27-36. Thu, 14 May 2020 14:11:16 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878056 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878056 Kalpana, I like that you connected Barron (2006) to this discussion. A quote from this article that connects well is "although physical access to computing tools is becoming less of an issue, there are still stark differences among children and adolescents in access to learning opportunities that will help position them to use computers in ways that can promote their own development" (Barron, 2006, p. 194). I think that it is our responsibility as educators to level the playing field with our use of technology. Developing 21st century learners means building skills that will address and hopefully overcome a lack of access to certain edtech tools. However, not all communities have the support to provide students with these types of learning opportunities. Another quote from Barron (2006) that I connect to Selwyn's point is, "Schools are being asked to cultivate technological fluency, digital literacy, and other 21st century competencies. Yet, schools differ widely in the kinds of resources they offer" (Barron, 2006, p. 194). Both Barron (2006) and Selwyn argue that equity in EdTech may not be about offering the same access to tools, rather, it is how we cultivate the right experiences, how we frame the conversation about how to use technology, that really matters. Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49, 193-224. Wed, 13 May 2020 14:58:02 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878011 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1878011 Kalpana, I agree that educators are finally feeling that push to use tools that they have always had access to, but never used before. Though Selwyn says that schools are fully "digitized", in my opinion, institutions also limit choices of education technology. Meaning, some EdTech tools are not easily usable within an institution's operating system. An institution's choice of learning management system will make or break the experience of using certain EdTech tools. Educators can get trapped in the Microsoft tools versus Apple tools war. Personally, I am starting to put more energy into investigating tools that work on any device and any browser. The exclusivity that comes from big tech companies tremendously limits access to certain EdTech tools, and the choice of "who to go with" by institutions potentiates this exclusivity. Fri, 15 May 2020 16:39:35 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1877983 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1877983 I echo yours and Selwyn's sentiment about a lack of attention to social justice issues in EdTech conversations. We tend to focus on how a tool makes education better but fail to discuss how a tool addresses access to education. Even something as seemingly "simple" as the internet is not readily to everyone. Have you found, with the move to online education, that your students struggle with internet access? Where in the community can students access computers with internet access if they don't have these at home? Wed, 13 May 2020 14:33:10 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1876408 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1876408 My coworker is constantly raving about how her students love to play Kahoot as an exam review. Selwyn's (2017) point about education as a competitive endeavor is well taken here when I compare it to my feelings about Kahoot. I appreciate that Kahoot inspires the students to actively participate and have fun during an exam review, but does it really help them learn the material? Or does it help them memorize key words and answers to multiple choice questions? Selwyn (2017) points out that using competition in education directly contradicts the goal of learning to work in teams, or the notion that education is a social science. However, this is where a savvy educator comes in- how can you take a fun competitive edtech tool like Kahoot, and incorporate it to facilitate team-building? How can we use it to facilitate learning and not just memorization? Fri, 15 May 2020 16:25:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1876181 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200877?scroll_to=1876181 Admittedly, when I first started redesigning my fundamentals of nursing class with the iPad, I definitely expected a huge improvement in student performance as a result. What I learned, is that it wasn't necessarily the tool that impacted learning, but how I used the tool to change my philosophy of teaching. I connect Clark's (1994) sentiments to this "bit of advice" when Clark stated, "when a study demonstrates that media attributes are sufficient to cause learning, the study has failed to control for instructional method and is therefore confounded" (p. 25). Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29. Fri, 15 May 2020 16:42:58 -0400