345 Readings

2003-12-09T08:40:00.000-08:00

Reading Reaction Four:
Hasselbring's "Use of Computer Technology to Help Students with Special Needs"

Overview:
There are a large number of students that will not be served by a traditional educational program because they have a disability that impairs their ability to participate in a typical classroom environment. For many of these students, computers and other technologies are the answer because they give the opportunity for students with disabilities to function "normally" but accounting for the things that they are lacking. From simple dexterity issues to parapalegics, and all other mental, emotion and physical disabilities in between, there are a variety of tools that can help each student. With these assistive technologies, the students with disabilities will be able to function in included classrooms because their disablitlies will no longer hinder the rest of the class. This article also deals with the financial issues associate with these assistive technologies, which is the most significant reason why these technologies are not widespread.

Reaction:
This article talked a lot about how helpful and equalizing these technologies would be if we could just get them into the classroom and have teachers that are trained in utilizing these technologies with their students. It would be such a shame to receive the money to buy these technologies and have no one there to teach them or use them. If these technologies will really impact the children as significantly as this article proclaims, then it is important for me, as a future special educator, to know and learn as much as possible when it comes to the operation of these assisitive technologies. I am certainly glad that EDLF 345 is a required course, or I wouldnt have taken it. I have never been good with computers and I have always been intimidated by them. At least, by taking this class, I feel a lot more prepared to take on and learn how to use a piece of assistive software or technology. I understand the importance and value of this equiptment and I will definitely do my part in getting them into classrooms, and do my part in learning/being trained to utilize them.

2003-11-04T12:27:00.000-08:00

THE COMPUTER DELUSION

Agree/Disagree

I tend to agree with Oppenheimer when it comes to the radical and sever cutting of funds to facilitate massive amounts of technology in our public schools. Art, music and physical education programs are a fundamental part of public schools. These aspects of schooling that supplement the core subject areas, are often the primary outlets for creative expression, and the basic sources for providing a positive self-image and self-esteem. Physical education offers a means for expending energy, learning body control, sports and games, learning about one’s body and how to care for it, etc. No matter how much technology permeates education the value of a child learning to use a paint brush or utilizing his fingers to sculpt; the worth of learning to play an instrument or sing a song, or the importance of a child capitalizing on his or her athletic abilities or learning about personal health, can never be duplicated. There are things more important in education than forcing unused computers into every classroom.

Counterargument

Of course, technology is important. The world is becoming more and more reliant on technology and learning to use these tools can only help a student in the future. However, often times, a well-resourced computer lab can provide sufficient computer use for all students in schools. When the appropriation of money must come to the decision of cutting music, art or physical education, in order to accommodate for mass quantities of technology, I have a problem with that. Technology can provide so much for students, and I am well aware of that fact. But, the reality is, most teachers can not properly utilize these technologies nor do they take advantage of their capabilities. This class has opened my eyes to so many technological opportunities that I would never have been aware of. Almost my entire life, I have seen a computer in each one of my classrooms. However, there was only one time that I remember getting to use it: I broke my right hand in the 9th grade. I asked my teacher if I could use the computer to take notes in his class and he wouldn’t let me. After my mom called, and worked it out with a principal, the teacher eventually agreed. That isn’t to say that I never used a computer in school, because I often, almost weekly was given the opportunity to do so. This computer use, however, was in a library or computer lab setting. Oppenheimer’s argument is extreme, because technology surely has its place in education. I think that until we have enough funds to provide for all of the necessary subject areas (math, science, soc. studies, language arts, music, physical education, and art), only then should we be looking to spend the extra money on computers in EVERY classroom. I could never condone a student (who was able) not learning how to write because a child could more easily use a keyboard. Of course, if a keyboard, or a translator, was the only way the child could EVER write, then I am glad that there is that option. I could never allow my student to fall into “procedural thinking” patterns that so many computer programs foster, and have them abandon creative thinking. I guess, my counterargument against Oppenheimer is that I am glad that there is technology and there are so many ways that it can help our children. But, I can not even in good conscience refute some of what he is saying. It is important that children play with dolls and action figures with other children, acting out, pretending, imagining, and creating. I also acknowledge the computer games that allow children to play Barbie on screen or race Matchbox cars because they indulge a child’s fantasies so realistically. I just would never want to take away the tangible, friend to friend play, the imagination and created play that comes without visual stimulation or buttons to press. Oppenheimer is wrong in his radical technological views because it can be helpful, assistive and supplemental. However, he is right in that technology should never take over or take place of the irreplaceable and unparallel lessons that students use from hands on, real-life play, including art, music and phys. ed.

2003-10-07T09:11:00.000-07:00

How does the mere ubiquity of PowerPoint impact its effectiveness? Is this an issue for education?

Tufte suggests that because of the tryannical implications of Power Point, you lose the effectiveness of slideware as a proficient slide manager and projector. The reason for this, as Tufte states, is, "PowerPoint's pushy syle (that) seeks to set up a speaker's dominance over the audience." In this way, PowerPoint and other slideware, become somewhat disrespectful to the audience. In Tufte's opinion, "PowerPoint style routinely disrupts, dominates and trivializes content." The audience often feels insulted by the presenter's use of PowerPoint, because they realize that this breakdown of information super-simplifies content that would better be received in even a lecture format.
In education, this sets up an uncomfortable environment for the students. This boring, oversimplification and distortion of information "one damn slide after another," makes the students frustrated and averted to the course and instructor.
Students would rather just download the slides, read them at home, and suppliment the content on their own.
In my experience, teachers who ineffectively use PowerPoint, make me want to scream! Especially when they give out the slides ahead of time, ask you to print them off, and require attendance, only so that they can read you the information on the slides word-for-word from the screen in front of you, the handout in front of you, and it is the exact material from the reading from the night before, and the professor makes you come every day! I HATE THAT!

Do you agree with Tufte's contention that children are "being taught how to formulate client pitches and infomercials" because of PowerPoint?

I dont think that this is true for several reasons. I think that most ineffective PowerPoints are neither fascinating nor persuasive. I dont think that these PowerPoints are influential enough to be considered "client pitches or infomercials." I think that for the most part, PowerPoint just turns children off from learning. Who wants to be taught by bullet lists, ambiguous charts, and pointless data?

When is using PowerPoint appropriate in education?

As we have discussed time and time again, PowerPoints are appropriate in class when they successfully supliment the information being taught, by giving the lesson an aspect that would never be conveyed by any other feasible medium (lecture, worksheets, etc.) I lprefer the student-centered learning PowerPoints, when the content becomes interactive for the children.

How can you get students to determine for themselves when a use of the program is appropriate (i.e., you can't just tell them; they need to think for themselves).

Students need to know how to evaluate what a program is trying to convey. Are you learning from the program? Is it helping you grasp a concept? or, is it telling you the answer, providing you with all of the information with relatively little thought? I think that children can tell relatively easily if a "learning program" is appropriate, even if that is not their conscious thought. Appropriate learning programs that involve the children getting to think for themselves and learning on their own, tend to be much more fascinating and engaging than programs that simply tell children what they should know. In school, did we as students prefer the "skill and drill" games, or were we drawn to "Oregon Trail"?

2003-09-16T11:22:00.000-07:00

"Hop, skip... and software?"

Many of the teachers in today's elementary, middle and high schools are not from a technology-centered generation. As Becky Fisher said, "... most kindergarteners have already mastered more technology than existed when I was a child." This means that many of these teachers were educated and practiced in lesson plans dealing with hands-on experience and traditional teaching methods when they were completing their teaching certification. They have incorporated these conventional and long-established lessons into their curriculum and seen the desired effects. They have taught their students in a similar manner in which they were taught and have seen positive results. It is only natural to expect that these same teachers will be skeptical to integrate technological lessons into their already productive curriculums. These teachers may be worried about the virtual experience only taking away from what can be learned from actual experience. In many ways, this can be true. It is mostly a matter of opinion. Do you think a young child will gather the same understanding from virtually dressing and interacting with a Barbie doll as the child will actually picking out, putting on, and fastening the clothes onto Barbie? Do you think virtually racing matchbox cars on a video game gives a child the same knowledge as a child actually racing his car on the track he put together, watching the physics and feeling the motion of the speed and strength a car may need to make it through the upside down loop of the track without falling out? Do you believe that the children learning about Williamsburg virtually received the same amount of information and understanding as the children who made costumes, pens, lanterns and meals of the Williamsburg time period? The answers to these questions are purely subjective to the person answering them. Also, many teachers are afraid to pursue technological lessons because they themselves know nothing about technology. In turn, these teachers rely on their hands-on, reality lessons to provide all of the information their students need. I personally believe that the answer lies somewhere in the middle. Imagine how much knowledge the student will gain if he or she virtually tours Williamsburg, actually tours Williamsburg, asks questions about the costumes, meals and crafts of the time period AND in fact creates these things in actuality. Sure we want our students to experience the world on a first hand basis, but technology has come to offer us some pretty exciting educational opportunities that would be a shame not to take advantage of.
There are some things that technology can provide that simply cannot be replicated in the "real world," such as the vast selection of internet resources literally at our fingertips that would take weeks to find in libraries by hand. Of course, students should be forced to learn how to use the card catalog system, the Dewey decimal system, where reference books, nonfiction books, etc. can be found in the library; technology is not available to us when the power goes out, or computers, etc. shut down. However, with the imposition of SOL material and other time constraints on today's educational curriculum, technology offers us a variety of time saving equipment.
I also think that there is a lot of merit in the virtual tour. Taking a tour of Williamsburg online takes students in Michigan a lot closer to the site at which so much of our country's history has taken place than they might ever have the opportunity to come. It also provides us with a great supplemental learning device for students in Virginia Beach taking an actual field trip to Williamsburg to prepare. Of course there is so much more to experiencing places like Williamsburg than can ever be displayed online (the sounds, smells, emotions and conversations) but it is an amazing start for people who may not otherwise get there.
I am sure that I will encounter parents who do not see the need for technology in classrooms or may even fully oppose the idea. Luckily, as time goes on, I think that these kinds of parents will also decrease. However, I will tell these parents, with confidence, that I will be using technology in my classroom. Technology will be able to offer these student so many opportunities (such as virtual tours, quick resources, supplemental knowledge, as well as sources of educational and enriching entertainment) that I would never be able to give them otherwise. In addition, in a special ed. classroom, technology allows for so many adaptations and accommodations for the students that would be close to impossible to simulate in "real life."

2003-09-16T10:15:00.000-07:00

Reading Reaction Article "Hop, skip... and software?"
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~sdw3u/345/resources/readings/csmonitor.php