Now that I’ve wandered this byway of the assignment I can respond to the tasks of responding to the New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Technology Standards.
Although I’ve almost finished my teacher training, this is the first time I’ve heard of the Technology Core Curriculum Content Standards (CCCS). After reading this document I’m surprised that it hasn’t been mentioned. In two different courses I spent quite a bit of time deconstructing the Standards for Science (Standard 5: Science) and specifically my content area of biology; and other courses had me refer to it. However, as I read it, the Technology standard is unique in that is represents learning that is expected to be included by virtually every teacher in every class. The Introduction states the “Intent and Spirit of the Technology Standards”:
All students acquire content area knowledge and skills in: (1) Visual and Performing Arts, (2) Comprehensive Health and Physical Education, (3) Language Arts Literacy, (4) Mathematics, (5) Science, (6) Social Studies, (7) World Languages, (8) Educational Technology, Technology Education, Engineering, and Design, and (9) 21st Century Life and Careers. As they do so, they are supported by the ongoing, transparent, and systematic integration of technology from preschool to grade 12 in preparation for postsecondary education and the workplace.
I think that’s pretty much every subject. This is BIG. Perhaps my other teachers didn’t feel comfortable dealing with it, or felt it was implicit in their teaching (the use of technology was certainly discussed), or perhaps they just wanted to leave a little something to learn in this course?
My first impression is that the expectations for students are very high. For example, “in grades 3-4, students understand the purpose of, and are able to use, various computer applications.” And “In grades 9-12, students demonstrate advanced computer operation and application skills by publishing products related to real-world situations.” On the one hand, I’m glad the standards show high expectations; I will be very pleased if these goals can be achieved. On the other hand, in my experience many students today are nowhere near meeting these goals. Perhaps it depends on what is meant by words like “advanced”. I believe technology is changing so fast that what is most important is a firm grounding in the concepts and not the specifics of most programs.
I am still confused as to how the Technology CCCS is supposed to work in the classroom. It is different than other CCCSs, such as my area of Biology, in that students don’t take a course in “technology” (at least every year, at least at this time). I thought all the different CCCS dealt with what students should learn in each subject area. For example, if I am teaching high school biology the CCCS tells me what I am expected to teach my students in the Content Statement and gives an idea of the kinds of evidence that would show their understanding such as described in the Cumulative Progress Indicators (CPI). However, while the Technology CCCS includes the same kind of Content Statements and Cumulative Progress Indicators I’m unclear who’s actually responsible for making sure that these are included, in what classes, and that they have been achieved. With each teacher being expected to take responsibility for including technology in their teaching, how do we avoid leaving holes in the students knowledge or repeating, for the umpteenth time, technology instruction that they have already been exposed to? It’s clear to me that it is important for today’s students to leave school with technological literacy, and it’s obvious that that means including it’s use in my assignments. However, I also think my content knowledge is vital for students to learn and I can only see including technology in a way that supports and increased their learning my content area. Does my responsibility also extend to training them in the use of technology for it’s own sake? If so, it’s not clear to me how I can do this while still maintaining high standards in the content area curriculum.
Like the teacher in the Hydrology video, I’m excited by the idea of incorporating this kind of learning into my lessons. However, that is different than taking responsible for the students’ technology education. At best I can take responsibility for my own (continuing) technology education. In some ways I feel I have an advantage in that I’ve already taught myself a good deal about the use of technology and programs like Photoshop, InDesign (page layout), Illustrator (vector art), PowerPoint, etc. that I would like to share with my students. On the other hand, I am very insecure in my ability to come up with worthwhile authentic learning assignments such as the one described in the Hydrology video. I look forward (with some trepidation) to attempting to do just that, but first I’ll try looking at a piece of the Standard.
I love your honest assessments - maybe it comes from experience. So, do you think schools prepare students for the technology that awaits them after school? I spoke to my brother who works for the government (he was special forces and now works with the military with strategic planning, etc, etc.) and he says that we are 15 years behind in tehcnology (our government gets hacked by teenagers from china and russia). This may explain so of the push for tech standards in school.
ReplyDeleteNow, why have you not heard about these standards? They are not assessed on standardized testing. SO, right now teacher and school are off the hook. If it is not on the test, must not be important.
You are correct - they are mind boggling. I watched my neice - 4 years old - take my brother's IPAD and navigate to get to his games. The ease and comfort of kids today around technology.
What if she could pick up a pencil and write all her letters fluently and with ease? Would we not sit down with her (and make sure she was formally instructed) and her her beginning writing sentences and longer pieces of written works? We would definitely want the school to address her "giftedness" and challenge and develop her skills.
You bring up a lot of thoughts. I hope your classmates read and comment on your blog.
DO you think you could have shared like this in a face to face classroom?
I was at a Superbowl party on Sunday where a 2 1/2 year old occupied herself by navigating her books and games on an iPad- at last years party she had just learned to walk! We started my son on interactive educational style computer games when he was 3 or 4 (he just turned 16). Most kids today take these things as part of the world that "has always been there". However, once these simple interfaces are mastered, the real work begins. I agree we need to help our children and students become technologically literate, and I also agree that there is terrific potential for increased learning by incorporating what technology has to offer.
ReplyDelete"DO you think you could have shared like this in a face to face classroom?"
In some ways yes, and some ways no. I was nervous about sharing my disagreements with the first video without seeing your face. I want to be honest in expressing my ideas, but I don't want to antagonize anyone either. I miss the ability to "read" the listeners' reactions, and I also miss the instant sharing of ideas of a class discussion. I do like being able to give thought before I "speak" and spending the time to express my ideas without worrying about over-dominating a class discussion. On the other hand, it is much more time consuming than having a classroom discussion.
You are correct - so much of human interaction is nonverbal. That is the skill kids today do not have - nonverbal social cues.
ReplyDeleteIt is beneficial for those people who are shy and can never get a word in because of those who share too much.
Again, I love that you throw grenades on what I share with you. It is so important to make individual sense of what is out there. That, I believe, is one of our main jobs as educators - helping our students to be discriminating consumers of information.
"With each teacher being expected to take responsibility for including technology in their teaching, how do we avoid leaving holes in the students knowledge or repeating, for the umpteenth time, technology instruction that they have already been exposed to?" This quote really struck me because as I was reading the technology standards, I kept thinking back to my school experiences in which, like you said, I had lessons that taught the same things such as how to conduct research online again and again in different classes. Schools need to figure out how to include technology in each class without having too much overlap of the same basic lessons in each class.
ReplyDelete