Tinkerings

In an answer to the age-old problem of “Which came first, the chicken or the egg,” I read this week that scientists have finally decided the chicken had to come first.  The chicken creates some type of protein necessary for the egg shell to harden.  So, they concluded, the egg would not have had this protein without first being inside the chicken.  Wow.  Thanks for that.

A larger question, for me at least, emerged this week at our DEN LC Symposium.  I was leading a group discussion on the power and pitfalls of allowing students the unique privilege of using their cell phones in class.  Our group was sharing best practice ideas of how cell phones could be used to create podcasts, produce videos, snap pictures for assignments, respond to questions using text, view video tutorials hosted at iTunes and much more.  It was a great discussion.

Then one of our many STAR educators hit me upside the head with the reality stick.  Lisa Parisi said something to the effect that it sounded like we had discovered this great tool and we were trying to find creative ways to use it.  Instead, she continued, we should be looking at curriculum and standards and developing lesson plans and only then deciding which piece of technology (if any) would best help us and the students in the learning process.

That was a light-bulb-over-the-head moment for me.

This article from the Washington Post helps demonstrate her point.  It discusses the boom in sales for Interactive Whiteboards such as SMART and Promethean.  Our school just purchased a Promethean board and short throw projectors for every classroom.  The article talks of teachers who are using the product with minimal results.

DISCLAIMER: To be fair, those teachers frustrated with the lack of gains using an IWB seem to be those that are just using them as a glorified way to lecture; a new PowerPoint if you will.  Reading the article you will find few who are actually engaging students with the boards.  But I think Lisa’s point is still valid: design the lesson first and choose the technology second.

Teachers are under pressure now to “use those boards” every day in their classes.  This seems reasonable.  After all, schools just spent tens of thousands of dollars purchasing them, installing them, and training teachers to use them.  But what if it isn’t the best tool for the job?  What if you don’t need technology at all?

I teach in a computer lab.  My kids get hands-on computer experience nearly everyday.  Yet, even in that environment there are days when our kids won’t touch a computer.  We want them in circles talking.  We want them manipulating things together on a table top.  Could I put them in a chat room for the discussion?  Sure!  Will I? Well….it depends.

If the goal of the lesson is to get kids to work collaboratively to discuss a particular aspect of a story, or design a math lesson for their peers, or talk about their summer vacation, then no, they don’t need a computer for that.  If, however, the goal is to demonstrate for them the power of collaboration in a Web 2.0 environment where they learn how to discuss these things together at home outside of class, then yes, a chat room or a Google Doc would be perfect.

We are pushed so hard to earn the title of a 21st Century Classroom.  But whether we like it or not, this is the 21st Century.  Every classroom is now a 21st Century Classroom with or without technology.

So. back to my question.

I have to change my paradigm a bit.  The lesson has to come first.  It contains the “protein” that solidifies the reason to use the technology.  Not just any old technology.  The right technology.  Sometimes that’s a computer. Sometimes a phone. Sometimes an iPod. Sometimes an IWB.  And sometimes it is something just as revolutionary in its day: a pencil, a crayon, or a foldable.