Thinking Computers and Education

This module’s question:

What is the trend among educators relative to beliefs in technology, culture and the power of computer assisted learning? As you respond to this consider the notions of construed reality, own cultural influences,  influences from cultures unfamiliar to you, and the view that computers will likely be able to achieve human like thinking ability. You might also scan the links below:

My Response: (Notes on individual sources follow)

What is the trend among educators relative to beliefs in technology, culture and the power of computer assisted learning?

I’m not sure that I can speak to a single trend beyond anecdotes. There seem to be several groups that dominate the discussion, from technophiles such as myself, to the guarded (not early adopters or technophiles, but willing to engage with guidance) to the resistant.

Within the ESL/EFL/ELL field, there are special interest groups related to CALL (Computer-assisted Language Learning) that goes back to the days of language labs and headsets for every user to practice simulated language use. I think most teachers are willing to engage with technology where there is evidence that it can improve outcomes for students. Resistance appears to come from educators generally uncomfortable with change or comfortable in their current ability to bring students to set outcomes.

 

Sites to Scan: These were identified to provide you with links to a variety of resources that contain trends, developments, perspectives, philosophies and other tid-bits of information.  As a collection it is disposed only as an incomplete base.  At best the links provide you with a starting point from which to view a host of ideas on the topic of this module.  Within the links you will find trends, collection of philosophical views, issues, position papers, chronicles, titles, training opportunities etcetc

This resource is no longer available.

Basic history of calculators from 1950s onward.

Network access assessment tool called “Checkmate” uses “neural networks” to determine the intent of a user’s access on a network and block out hackers as effectively as human network administrators. Sold commercially.

Sadly, this link points to the same article as above.
  • Harris, Mishra, and Koehler provide a small collections of views and philosophies on Teachers technological and pedagogical practices related to computer integration into learning: http://mra.onefireplace.org/Resources/Documents/TPCK%20Article.pdf (JRTE, 41(4), 393–416. Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Learning Activity Types: Curriculum-based Technology Integration Reframed. Judith Harris, Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler)

“TPACK encompasses understanding and communicating representations of concepts using technologies; pedagogical techniques that apply technologies appropriately to teach content in differen- tiated ways according to students’ learning needs; knowledge of what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help redress concep- tual challenges; knowledge of students’ prior content-related understanding and epistemological assumptions, along with related technological expertise or lack thereof; and knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing understanding to help students develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones” (Harris, J., Mishra, P., Koehler, M., 2009).

This article reinforces the idea of how technology, content knowledge and pedagogy must work together (TPACK), and suggests how to plan to use all three in learning activities for students.

Basic jist is that teachers aren’t using technology to its fullest educational potential: “Researchers emphasize technology uses that support inquiry, collaboration, and reformed practice, whereas many teachers tend to focus on using presentation software, learner-friendly Web sites, and management tools to enhance existing practice” (p. 393).

Seems to be offline (2012.10.23)

Dense. My head hurts. I’ll have to reexamine this one later.
I have to completely agree with the introduction: The breathy adulation for the newest form of media through which we transmit information is not closer to the ideal “freedom of information” that some espouse – it’s merely appropriate for the context of the time it is tied to. While the written word, and its ability to transmit information over time and space was transformative, as was the newfound accessibility through the printing press, the radio, the TV and now the Internet, it is still constrained by the characteristics of the delivery system. While the accessibility is wide, the freedom of the press is still limited to the person who owns one. Without the tools of access and creation, the information may as well not exist at all.
In the summary of the paper to be presented by Blanchette, I noticed this quote: “while digital humanists may well benefit from engaging in “computational thinking,” I will argue the computing infrastructure implicitly performs much of that thinking, before a single line of application code is written” (“Infrastructural Thinking” as Core Computing Skill, para. 2). I could not help but be reminded of McLuhan’s “the medium is the message.”

Published by

Kimberly Hogg

As a child, Kim would take apart anything she could put a screwdriver in to figure out how it worked. Today, she's still interested in exploring the processes and limits of our tools, whether online or in hand. Kim enjoys exploring and learning about anything and everything. When not at a computer, she enjoys birdsong and the smell of pine needles after a rain. Kimberly holds an MEd in Information Technology and a BA in Communication Studies. You can contact Kim here or on Twitter @mskhogg.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.