At the beginning of the semester, I had a rather negative view of the course.  Integrating technology into my classroom seemed like a daunting task I did not think I would have the time or resources to do.  However, that view has changed over time.  While I never had issues finding ideas about class related technology, I had trouble thinking of ways to incorporate it instead of simply replace pen and paper work.  It still is not something that seems natural to me, but I now think I have a better understanding of how to successfully integrate technology.  I think that showing primary text documents in an ELA class could be very helpful for students and they could be used in a number of ways, either complementing a piece of literature we are reading or by showing that all authors edit their work, just in different ways.  Likewise, students can access points of view from around the world about a subject, something lack traditional/no technology classrooms cannot offer.

I do not recall ever using much technology in school.  My teachers used overhead transparencies for everything and we stopped using the computer lab in elementary school.  Looking back, I can pick out several assignments that would have been both easier for the teacher and more beneficial for the students if they had integrated technology.  At the time, however, it was just not possible.  I do not expect every classroom I am in to be fully equipped with resources, especially as a first year teacher, but knowing that options exist totally change the game.

Can I expect that every one of my students will be familiar with technology inside and outside the classroom?  Probably not.  And while their home technology is not something I can control, I can give my students the opportunity to become technologically fluent in the classroom, even with limited resources.  Stations or rotating roles in collaborated learning ensures that all students can become computer literate.  This is especially important in a low SES school, where students are disadvantaged in a plethora of ways.  Regardless of the availability of the internet at home, I can prepare my students, and help to close the digital divide, by integrating technology into my class.

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.

The article, Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture, offered several good insights into the changes of the classroom and the way technology can play a role.  I do agree that children should be given every opportunity to access educational digital media, but I also feel the article overstated the value of some programs.  For example, using a game like Cyber Nations as homework for a history class may not be such a great idea, contrary to what Jenkins suggests.  After reading the article, I looked for some of the games, including this one, and found that they would be beyond time consuming for students and, in the case of Cyber Nations, offer little advice on how to run a country.  In its benefit, it does teach money management.

I do not think that Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture answered many questions about how to close the digital divide.  Jenkins states that after school programs should not just be used for assignment catch up, but should integrate media literacy skills into the curriculum.  This would be a great idea if the majority of children in the programs did not need extra assistance with their schoolwork.  Having tutored for several after school programs, I have seen that this is not the case.  Most of the children have either fallen behind on work or need help understanding what they learned in class that day.  Not all schools have a plethora of options for teaching media literacy, and parents can be even more limited.

While Jenkins maintains that the core skills and competencies required for full participation in the participatory culture are being haphazardly integrated into educational settings, he suggests very little in the way of how to improve.  I am not against media literacy education but I believe it is much harder to systematically implement than Jenkins says.  Some schools and parents have more resources so they will be able to produce media literate students who are savvy at adapting and taking credit for their published work.  But other schools will have difficulty integrating advanced technology (that is technology beyond the VHS player) and there is a whole bundle of policies that Jenkins does not address.  How can we, as teachers, help students become meaningful members of the participatory culture when we do not always have the resources to do so?