Working with the public, school board, administration, and teaching staff all differ from working with students in many ways. In other words, these school communities are all different playing fields with the same goal in mind, which is to increase student learning.
Administration and the school board are important links to integrating technology into our schools and it is paramount they support this move. It is the technology integrator’s job to show proof that a particular technology can increase learning in our schools. Teachers are to collaborate and learn from one another on the best possible ways to educate our students. Now here is the difference: while dealing with students, it’s the teacher’s job to promote learning. The teacher now plays the middleman between student and the technology coordinator. It is the instructor’s job to provide the students with the tools they need to promote learning and then sell the school community on the students needs. Retrieving proof through a student-centered classroom is an avenue in obtaining this evidence while instructors interact with the students and establish relationships, keeping in mind the diversity of a 21st century learner. Knowing the different learning styles and needs will increase your justification on how and why we need to integrate a particular tool. This is where universal design for learning, (UDL), can be used. UDL is not just about bringing in technology tools. King Sears (2009) says, “UDL is not defined solely by the integration of technology. It is important to note that the concept is about redesigning pedagogy for all learners, not about which current digital tools are integrated”. It is vital that the public, school board, administration, and teaching staff collaborate and share with one another the 2.0 tools that are working in the UDL framework. The individual is the best assessor of the effectiveness of each digital tool or technological accommodation since regardless of what the research says if it is not effective for a given individual, and then another tool should be substituted.
There are many obstacles in technology integration. I’ll touch on a few. First would be money. We all have heard this and/or said it ourselves that there is no money for technology. Second would be lack of administration, colleague support and parent’s lack of experience in the use of technology. We all know that teacher who would rather use a dry-erase board than use a Promethium board. Integrating technology into schools does not always mean you have to spend money. There are free tech tools at our disposal. Be creative with what we have and use these tools as much as possible. There are several free technology tools on the Internet. For example: web 2.0 such as virtual field trips, WebQuests, and promethium planet, etc.
Reference:
King-Sears, M. (2009). Universal design for learning: Technology and pedagogy.
Learning Disability
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2004). Understanding by design: Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Apple Computer, Inc. (1995). Changing the conversation about
Teaching, learning, & technology: A report on 10 years of
ACOT research. Cupertino, CA: Apple Computers, Inc.
EDU-640-X2379 (2013) INTEGRATING DIGITAL TECH I
13TW2 (EDU-640-X2379_13TW2) LEARNINGMODULES
> MODULE ONE > MODULE RESOURCES 2013
