Summary of chapter 5 The Wrong
Technology Implementation
At the beginning,
the author proposed two technology paradoxes. One is that “technology is still
disproportionally underused or misused,” (page 93), and another is that “technology
is reportedly overused outside school despite being underused inside school”.
(page 94)
Then, he illustrated
two different models which were Before 3 p.m. Model and After 3 p.m. Model to
examine these two paradoxes by comparing different implementation of technology
in different contest and conditions, that is, insider school and outside school.
And as a reflection, he analyzed these two models from five contrasting qualities
of technology implementing include efficiency, motivation, execution, support and
user reaction to explore several effective ways to solve these two paradoxes of
technology implementation.
Well, he did make it
and suggest three alternative ways to optimally promote the implementation of
technology in education that unleash the true strength of technology, (page 102)
serve the long tail of knowledge, (page 103) and design a space for
possibilities inspiring by the concept of “empty space” in Chinese art. (page
105)
As a conclusion in the end, he pinned down
diverse reasons of two paradoxes from real bulk-user of technology in class to
real audience and freedom in using technology. Although the author didn’t
mention the title about “top down versus bottom up” in the whole chapter
content, I can clearly understand what the title means that the main body of
technology implementation should be students, not teachers.
In the Before 3 p.m. model, teacher provided specific
lesson instructions and explicit learning objectives to students and even told
them how to accomplish it with technology. He controlled everything of students’
learning and left no possibilities for further development in technology
implementation that students may just know the keyboard is a tool for typing
characters instead of an important input of diverse information.
Although the teacher
cared about students’ interests level and asked students to take a relevant survey
after class, it was not benefit for cultivating their interests that “the
curriculum is the first priority to be fulfilled, rather than students’
interests.” (page 98) And he just used the internet as a way to get access to
the curriculum syllabus and computer as a screen for displaying learning
objectives. Technology was underused obviously in his class as one of the
paradox concerning about.
But in the After 3
p.m. model, there was less support and instruction for students, they had no specific
objectives to follow in learning and exploring. No one in side told them how to
search experts’ video in YouTube for professional promoting and how to
construct a complex maze or defend their secret garden from attack of zombies,
but they just did it and performed very well by using technology because of
their interests.
Similarly,
researchers just putted a computer with internet connecting in a wall without
any necessary instruction in India, but those underprivileged children could
learn English sentences, DNA knowledge and negotiate with peers about a range
of matters although they were confused about the computer and its complexity in
the beginning. They successfully convert this negative situation into positive
learning motivation without teachers’ nodding and padding for encouragement. They
have interests on learning by a computer in an unleashed situation with enough
possibilities for development, and they succeed in the process of self-learning.
In process of
students’ learning, teachers should try their best to help students arouse
their interests and initiative in implementing technology to reinforce their
learning and provide sufficient space for students to use technology freely
without setting too much restriction, instead of putting students in hands all
the time. In addition, teachers shouldn’t underestimate students’ possibilities
on creative working and self-exploring intentionally or nonintentionally,
conversely they need help them establish their own confidence on problem
solving by using technology. Optimally unleash the real strength of technology
and give students more freedom on using technology is better than restrict
students in a square classroom with a limited technology.
