Technology at what price?

"When you think about it, our current paradigm of education is not designed for learning; it is designed for sorting." - Reigeluth, 1992

This quote was quite startling to me on the surface. In fact, it is quite true. But nonetheless, it isn't the way we're comfortable looking at education, especially as educators. We tend to think more highly of ourselves - and the field. But when you strip away the fluff, this is quite an accurate statement...by the end of high school, students have been sorted, into social groups, intellectual groups, athletic groups, that proceeds into college (if they go) or wherever they land after graduation.

Reigeluth's suggestion that technology is a necessity to change from sorting to learning is interesting. His article is 15 years old, and in that time, technology has certainly been integrated into classrooms, and the focus has shifted dramatically. My district recently had a long-overdue technology upgrade, and we now have smart projectors in every classroom. Interactive learning is useful, and the hands-on experience makes many things much faster for students to grasp. For example, on Groundhog Day my kindergarteners had NO idea what a groundhog was - pulling up a video was much more engaging than showing them a picture. Is it better learning? If they're engaged - especially in kindergarten, all day, I think it's a win. Technology gives me the ability to vary the pace and entertainment level with them. We can have brain breaks, short dance videos, interactive readalouds, and other activities that reengage them when they're drifting.

It also allows me to use RAZ (reading A-to-Z) to do individually self-paced reading with students. They can do this at home, and at school, exactly at their reading level, whether they're reading at an A or an L (I have both in the classroom). They read from book boxes as well, but RAZ keeps a check on where they're at and moves them along in between assessments.

Neil Postman's "Of Luddites, Learning and Life" was so radically different...I actually found myself leaning much more in this direction, despite all the technology we use. my district is heavily focused on Visible Thinking, and we use a lot of writing tools to "map our thinking." I love the simplicity of his questioning what problem is addressed by the solution. So often we over complicate things, just for the sake of complexity. Kids are so used to technology - at this point, none of my students have grown up in a world without tablets and iPhones. They use them as well - or better - than I do. So while they're really comfortable, does it teach them to think?

He simplified the goal of education at the end to several things. I've always simplified it even further. I believe my goal is simply to teach children to think. There is a whole laundry list of things to accomplish along the way, but at the end, if they learn to think for themselves, there's almost nothing they cannot do. Thinking is the key. And often, technology becomes a barrier to that. It prevents thinking, or does it for us. When we take it away, and take out the giant roll of paper, markers, and start writing, a whole new world opens up. So while I'm the first to admit I can't live without my iPhone, I will also stand up and say I'm a better person without it. And I think our classrooms and students are better without technology. We've learned to teach at the expense of it, but I think it has cost more than it has won.