I think this plan outlines some much needed changes in schools.  However, I feel like it falls short in practicality.  First, I think that educators should exploit all the resources they can, and I would guess that most truly want to.  But, no matter the amount of time spent with professional development or seminars, which can present you with ideas that sound great in theory but simply do not work in the classroom, there is no way to constantly use up to date resources.  The plan calls for a new approach from a new R&D organization to bring ideas of educational technology uses.  By the time the findings of these groups reach teachers, there may be better options already available.

Second, I do believe that, as it is with most changes to education, change should happen quickly.  However, if we have to wait for all fifty states, all districts and schools, the federal government, and all other education stakeholders to come together in order to fully design and implement technology in the classroom, it seems as though we still have years of waiting ahead of us.  Because of this, I think educators have to be proactive with change.   If we are expected to better the situation now, we cannot sit around and wait for policymakers and R&D teams to tell us how to do it.  This is a pretty big responsibility, which requires tons of time and effort, to carry around.

I recently saw a seventh grade ELA teacher struggle with using a limited number of laptops in her classroom.  She has over twenty students and only nine computers.  Instead of pairing students up to work collaboratively, she randomly drew nine numbered popsicle sticks and allowed those nine children to work with the technology.  I am sure, or at least I hope, she has contemplated different methods of sharing technology than this, but that she has simply found this to be the easiest way.  If she were to wait until someone could tell her how she should be using this technology, fifteen children would lose out every year.  So it is up to the educator to decide, through trial and error, just how to implement technology in the classroom.  It seems like creating local R&D teams in individual schools and districts, instead of waiting for the Department of Education to take the reins, might be more effective.  Do you think it would be a better idea to wait until R&D teams have decided what is best or to spend extra time in collaboration with other educators around you?  Is technological design and use something we can tackle alone, and still have positive results?

I definitely agree that classroom activities must include intense interaction, including integrating activities outside of the classroom as well, to ensure that students are able to make authentic connections to the material.  Simply giving students the chance to play around with word processing applications or a game will probably not prove to be beneficial.  I also think that, in order to successfully use technology into our classroom, we have to move outside our comfort zones.  The only way I remember using technology in a classroom was to compile a slideshow, or something to that effect, which is not enough to cognitively engage students with their work.  And while it is easier said than done, we certainly need to learn to be flexible and open to new ideas that might work in the classroom, especially when we are working in low SES schools, where computer use may not extend into the home.

Warschauer’s conversation regarding advanced activities reminded me of something my 16 year old brother showed me this weekend.  He is taking Chinese as his foreign language component at a school in Oklahoma and was excited about a Notepad program he was required to have on his computer.  With the program, he was able to take notes on an English keyboard and it was then magically transcribed into Chinese.  I could not help but wonder how much this was really helping him learn the language since he was not able to translate the sentences, and actually had to convert them back to English to be able to read more than a few words.  How can we expect students to use higher level cognitive learning when we ask them to use only basic programs, either because we do not know others exist or because these are the programs with which we are most familiar?  I am not sure the prevalence of programs like this in schools, but I believe that he could have been shown some amazing resources for the class but instead was given what amounts to a big waste of time.