One argument you often hear in the technology in teaching debate is “You’ll all have to use technology in the classroom sooner or later”, to which my reaction is “Fine. If those are the two choices, I’ll take later please”.
Reasons why:
– By the time I start using the technology, it will work properly
– It’ll also be more user friendly
– And cheaper
– And my students will be more used to it, cutting down on wasted class time
– And the crappy technology will have disappeared
– And the best technology will be so well known I won’t even have to go looking for it
– And they’ll be loads more support
– It’ll be worth writing about it because its use won’t be limited to a rich elite of teachers and/ or students, and how it works won’t change every other day
– They’ll be less chance of that disastrous first experience that could put teachers and/ or students off for life
Two examples
– The latest IWB projectors in our school are silent and turn the board completely black when you press “blank” on the remote control. If that, rather than a constant whirl and glowing blue screen that makes your eyes hurt had been my first experience, maybe I’d be using it more now.
– I put a lot of effort into using and writing about Xtranormal, and now they’ve changed the whole thing. Bastards! Didn’t lead to enough extra learning to have to start all over again with it, frankly.
TEFLtastic 
Alex,
I hear what you’re saying – but really, in the end, you’re relying on us early adopters to do all the hard work for you. If it didn’t get done, many of the products you might want to be using at some point won’t meet commercial success or critical mass. There’s a symbiotic relationship in there, but don’t forget us :-)
Gavin
LikeLike
Alex,
I don’t think there ever should be “choices” except for the choice – is it the best way to reach the objective I’ve set? (all things considered). Technology allows a lot to happen but so does a pencil. Teachers use with their own discretion towards the learning objective and also the motivation of students (and using technology, the “how” you do it, does indeed motivate and lead to learning).
Now Gavin talks of early adopters. I think that is false. A lot would still be paraded out to us, even if there weren’t any early adopters. It’s a red herring. Does it work for students/teachers or doesn’t it? Are those making the applications/tool, knowledgeable and informed by and through educators? These seem the important questions. But at the end of the day, it is still, untested or tested, a question of whether it helps us reach our lesson objectives.
David
LikeLike
David,
It’s not a red herring. Were it not for early adopters, many tools, gadgets and innovations would never get to those who wait – it’s pure economics.
Gavin
LikeLike
I think they get their own rewards out of it, whereas anyone who is forced into it would not
I see your point about is it the best way to teach something David (although see my last post on whether that really is the best way to think about planning), but surely the more important calculation is what the most efficient way of using our planning time to achieve learning is
LikeLike
Make that “feels forced into it”
LikeLike
David, I agree:
Are those making the applications/tool, knowledgeable and informed by and through educators? These seem the important questions.
And I would even go so far as to insist that they should be done by people who are teaching and who understand the needs of students… there is a lot of flash and dash out there so I understand Alex’s aversion.
However, Alex, you have the knowledge, the experience and pedagogy. I think your hanging back does neither world any favours.
Karenne
LikeLike
It’s a balance thing again.
A lot of gadgets get produced and marketed as language teaching/learning aids and when you see them you just think – what is the point of that?
There is the ‘wow’ factor we all had when we saw the internet for the first time and I’ve never seen an IWB but I’m sure it would be exciting for kids especially.
The ‘excitement’ factor is very important in learning – if you and the students have that dead, dull feeling in class, not much learning can take place. Anything you can do to raise the interest level of yourself and the students is a good thing.
New technology does this for a while, but it doesn’t last for ever.
Such technology is hugely expensive, especially at first. Money would be better spent on reducing class sizes and teacher contact time if people were really serious about increasing learning.
These remain the two issues that most impact whether students learn much in class. If there are too many students to get your specific needs met learning is slowed while you wait for your turn to come. If the teacher is overloaded with class time and has no time or energy to prepare (both in the usual sense but also physically and mentally) for classes, they will not be able to teach well.
I think it’s pretty clear from most people’s experience that a class size of 6-12 students and a teaching load of 12-20 hours a week is very comfortable and has you feeling happy to go to work, and class sizes or 12-20+ and workloads of 25+ hours a week are very hard to sustain.
This may be irrelevant for the profit driven private sector, but it really ought to be the priority for any institution that claims to provide high quality learning.
Technology is too often a gimmick – a panacea for all the failings and shortcomings of the system or a way to deskill teachers and make us even cheaper to hire.
Or am I too cynical?
LikeLike
I go along with what Gavin has to say on this one, being an early adopter as well, and all that :-)
In the absence of people willing to beta test less than perfect versions of software, they would never reach the point where you would be in a position to consider trying them out.
As Andy says, there have been rubbish gadgets and software products launched on the market over the years; however, the more experienced you are at using tech tools, the better you get at spotting the lemons before the people who hold the purse strings waste their money on them.
Technology does not have to be hugely expensive in order to be effective at all; in fact, you can deliver quality tech-based learning on a shoestring budget if you put enough thought and effort into planning it, and the organisation you work for doesn’t throw a spanner in the works by blocking sites and dragging its heels over installing plugins and such.
Where the serious money really needs to be spent is on training teachers how to use technology, rather than on software and gadgets. You wouldn’t expect a teacher with no TEFL training to hit the ground running and deliver an effective language lesson; the same principle should apply when it comes to teaching with technology.
LikeLike
I absolutely don’t accept that being an early adopter makes you better at using technology. What did I learn from my Sinclair ZX 81 and ZX Spectrum that I can use nowadays?? Nuffink! Should’ve just waited until I could’ve afforded a decent computer!
LikeLike
LOL!, Alex :-)
What did I learn from playing games in the 1980’s that I can use nowadays? Probably not a lot… however, some of the skills I picked up while I was working in games development back then provided a useful foundation for the skills I’ve gone on to develop since.
I wouldn’t say that being an early adopter makes you better at using technology, but I do think that it makes it easier to keep pace with the way that technology keeps constantly shifting and changing. Tech skills also make you a lot more marketable as a teacher, and for that reason alone I’d say that it’s worth going with the flow and accepting the inevitable sooner rather than later.
Yes, it can be a nuisance having to re-learn how to use online tools when sites make changes to them, but I see that kind of thing as part and parcel of CPD, really… no different than investing time and effort in preparing to teach a level of English that you have never taught before or teaching to an unfamiliar exam board, with no guarantee that you will ever be called upon to teach it again. I’m sure most people who work in ELT have experienced that one at some time or other!
Sue :-)
LikeLike
I was thinking more of messing about with programming with BASIC, but same point applies??
I’m not sure your metaphor works. It’s more like “Would you like to be the guinea pig with this new textbook we’re adopting, or would you prefer to wait for next year when the other teachers will be able to give you tips on how to use it well and on where to find supplementary stuff. Or there’s always the chance that we’ll change to a better book by then anyway”
LikeLike
Thought you might have been, Alex – I was just being a bit cheeky ;-)
The difference between us I suppose it that I started messing around with programming in the 80’s, and never really stopped… which is probably why we see this one from such very different viewpoints.
A better question to pose perhaps, might be “Would you prefer to experiment with incorporating technology into your classroom now, on your own terms and at your own pace, or would you prefer to wait until you’re well behind in the game and competing for jobs with people who are skilled and experienced in using it?”
I’m very much against forcing teachers to use technology myself, as I think the way forward is to show them the benefits and encourage them to find ways to incorporate it in lessons that are going to work for them. I do get the impression though from reading around that teaching with technology is becoming less of an option these days and more of an expectation in some parts of the world…
LikeLike