Week 4:
Reflections
on readings
-
Tomorrow's Schools: Technology &
Reform in Reform Partnership
Tomorrow's Schools:
Technology & Reform in Reform Partnership
This was a nice final
article for the class. We were able to read about more amazing schools.
It was encouraging to see the that the introduction of technology was gradual.
I was also pleased to read about the struggles of the Saturn School.
The first two classrooms
that we read about had some ambitious projects going on in the rooms.
I liked how the schools focused on the projects and not the technology.
The technology was used to enhance the projects not to drive them.
This is how I want technology to be used in my room. I don't like
seeing students using education "games" only for the entire day.
The local heroes project of the Frank Paul school is an excellent idea.
I think that could be a worthwhile project for Lincoln. We could
start with the fact that Abe Lincoln christened the town before he was
elected to office and expand from there. Something that amazed me
about Frank Paul is that when they applied for their grant, the school
had to provide a vision for eight years into the future and to keep a portfolio.
So much can change in just eight years. I think it is great that
the school is planning so far in advance. A long term goal rather
than a quick fix-it plan.
It was interesting to
see that the Open School project was started before technology was introduced
to the school. The project seemed so big and impossible to do without
technology. The example was a good way to show the reader how technology
can be used to make projects better and to add more opportunities for learning.
I also really liked the example of the "instant city." It seemed
to be a great way to motivate the students as well as to start them to
think critically. Another comment that stuck out at me about the
Open School was that although the classrooms are student centered,
the teacher still provides structure as well as support. I feel that
often when a student centered classroom is discussed, the the teacher provides
support and guidance, but the structure is automatic. That just can't
be. The teacher still needs to provide structure of some kind.
It seems so often when
great schools are discussed, that we only see the end product. This
article showed us that it isn't so easy. The article seemed so honest
when it discussed the Saturn School and some of its struggles. I
know the article was written several years ago, but I wonder if the ratio
of boys to girls has changed. Last week when we were discussing whether
or not reform was worth the time or money, I told my group that I felt
that even though a plan might not work, it was still worth the try.
I think Saturn School is a perfect example. They tried to go without
a principal and use a select group of teachers to develop the curriculum,
but it caused some hard feelings, so they changed the plan. They
wouldn't have know though if they hadn't tried, so I think it was worth
finding out. I also assume that the test scores only temporarily
dropped?
There was a quote in
which I had to laugh, "if you design something powerful yet simple enough
for kids, it will be good for adults as well." Yes, I do believe
this for the most part, but I can list a few teachers that will never take
to technology no matter how simple it is. The article also pointed
out what we all already know, "Teachers need time to develop their own
technological skills." Then it mentioned that technology can take
three to five years for teachers to become involved. I have to wonder
though, by the time some of the reluctant teachers finally feel comfortable,
wont' the technology be outdated?
Back to the assignment
page.