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.