First, a disclaimer: I am a huge fan of technology and a true believer in its potential to fundamentally change how schools are run. Emerging technologies, often called ‘social media,’ are changing how many young people communicate and learn, how they approach learning, and how they process information.
But I think there are three reasons to worry. Reason one, the technology will be unevenly distributed, meaning that the gap between rich and poor will actually widen. Two, schools won’t respond to the creative potential of technology in positive ways. And, three, they will respond uncritically.
First, the technology gap (which I wrote about on this blog a few weeks back). This issue is major, because in most of history the rich have gotten richer, and there’s no reason to expect things to be different this time around. Creating special programs to put technology into schools with poor children won’t work unless those programs are accompanied by serious professional development, because most teachers I know are uncomfortable with computers and even more uncomfortable with the notion that kids know more than they do.
What do poor kids get when schools are their main source of advance technology? Not much! As teacher Esther Wojcicki of Palo Alto notes, kids in school are forced into what she calls ‘the airplane mode.’ “They’re told to sit down, strap in and face straight ahead for the duration of the flight.”
Right now, well off children have access to technology at home, meaning that they will find it easier to cope with the ‘powering down’ that happens when they walk into their schools. Not so for poor kids, who end up suffering through a lot of drill.
My second fear is that schools will resist innovation and become irrelevant. A tsunami, a huge wave of technology in the hands of young people, is approaching, but many educators seem unaware that their students swim in a sea of technology outside the school. They want to continue to use computers and other tools to control students and to manage information, and that’s about it.
Because they fear technology in the hands of kids, they look for ways to keep it out of schools. Continue reading
While his friends, admirers and supporters are many, Ted Sizer’s influence reaches far beyond that group. Make no mistake, Ted Sizer was one of the giants of American education, a force for good for more than 50 years.
I am proud to say that no recipient has walked away from the $25,000 financial prize. Despite the “attention grabbing” nature of the financial award, I am convinced that the public recognition, the validation of their excellence, and the opportunity to join a national network of reform-minded exemplary educators are probably of greater value to the winners. Those are there after the money is gone.
A central theme of the tribute: Lee Annenberg cared deeply about democracy and treated all she encountered with dignity.
Back to why: The thirst for money, prestige and fame are reliable spurs of innovation. Living in Silicon Valley as I do, I’ve seen plenty of evidence of that. Unfortunately, public education is not the road to travel if your goals are money, prestige and fame.
But the President went on, “And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.”
Ms. Spellings was never a teacher or school administrator but worked for the Texas School Boards Association and on a school reform commission for a previous Texas governor. Ms. Spellings is generally acknowledged to be a principal architect of No Child Left Behind, which she continues to defend with vigor. Always a feisty interview when she was in office, she clearly has not lost a step, as you will see.
The Merrow Report 