Ch.3--Rethinking Education

The Technology Skeptics’ Argument

The more I read this Collins and Halverson text, the more irate I become with it. So chapter 3 is supposed to be “the technology skeptics’ argument” but it’s more like “the technology enthusiasts’ opinion of the skeptics. I classify myself as a technology enthusiast, but Collins and Halverson seem more and more like liberal radicals as I continue to read on. Here are a few points throughout the chapter that irritated me and why:

• “…the central reason why schooling is so difficult to change is the nature of the teaching and learning practices” (p.35). Where do I even begin here, I’m not even a licensed teacher yet and my defenses are up. I actually don’t agree with this statement, for one, I’m learning in my FLED class that methodology changes based on needs of the time period and the needs of the society. So it’s not that teaching and learning practices are so difficult to change, it’s that technology changes so often that it’s difficult to adapt it with curriculum in a way that will still be useful after the course is over.

• “Students often know more about advanced information technologies than teachers and technology workers in schools” (p. 38). If this is true, and I know it is, it’s not that it’s terribly important to implement technology in the classroom to teach the students how to be successful with technology in the future but rather use what they already know (technology) to help them benefit their new learning (school content).

• “…teachers risk losing authority by integrating computers into their teaching” (p. 41). I don’t believe this at all, that’s like saying, “by integrating books into the classroom such as an encyclopedia or dictionary, teachers risk losing authority.” Now, I have had a few friends that ask why they even bother attending class when everything they ever wanted to know about anything can be found online. But you don’t see people dropping out of college like flies to pursue their learning via the internet; granted there are online courses, but those are usually facilitated by an instructor of some sort. Since anything can be posted online, it’s still very important to have teachers and experts available to decipher crap from valuable information. If anything, teachers back up their authority by integrating computers into their teaching, in my opinion.

• “…there is little room in the curriculum for adventurous uses of computers, such as to carry out in-depth research or complete meaningful projects” (p. 41). I’m not sure who exactly is saying this, but really? I feel like this book is looking at the past, I see schools attempting to incorporate computer work in their class work all the time. I had to use computers and various software programs all the time in high school and that was a good four years ago. None of the technology or programs are the same now anyways, so other than the past-present benefit (efficiency, ease, etc.) of using such technologies I really haven’t benefited greatly now in my college work.

• “School fosters just-in-case learning while technology fosters just-in-time learning” (p. 48). I feel both of these learning methods, if you will, are important. There are times when just-in-time learning is very appropriate and other times when I won’t have the just-in-time learning option and may need to rely on my just-in-case learning. So I feel this argument is null.

I really do feel that technology incorporated into the classroom is an excellent idea. However, I don’t think that it should be the central focus since it’s inconsistent and becomes irrelevant in a short period of time. As a future teacher, it is my mission to keep up the best I can with technology and to use it to make lessons in language learning more fun, exciting, and memorable.