Educational Software Models

Question:

We have looked at three very different types of computer software used in education (drill/tutoring; teacher-directed inquiry; and constructivist, student-directed inquiry). How do you see possibly using them in your classroom? Do you gravitate to one type versus another? Why? Or how might you coordinate the different types of software?

Response:

As a former English teacher, I have used both direct instruction and a constructivist student-centered approach to my teaching. However, I have never used any type of educational software in my classes. If I did have the opportunity to use such teaching aides, I would probably like to work with a program that incorporated a little bit of all three models: drill and tutoring, teacher-directed inquiry, and constructivist/student-directed inquiry. I believe that all three have value if used with the correct learning outcome or the concept to be learned.

For example, as an English teacher, I have to teach writing and literature. In my teaching of writing, I often focus on making sure that students understand writing as a formula: introduction, body, conclusion and revision, etc. I also need to make sure that students understand the basic elements of grammar/parts of speech before they attempt to write. I believe that the understanding of basic grammar allows students to self-edit, revise their work, and think about how and why they are writing what they are writing. Questions like does this sentence make sense? To what or whom is this pronoun referring to? Etc. In this case, an educational program that helped review, through repetitive practice is something that I would find valuable because students need to practice seeing and using “proper” grammar before they can become better writers.

Additionally, an educational software program that incorporated both teacher-directed inquiry and constructivist student-directed inquiry would also be of value. I believe that most constructivist student-directed inquiry educational software programs must have some level of direct instruction in order for them to be successful. It may be an instructional mini-lesson but if it is giving a lesson about a concept or topic it is still direct instruction.

I also believe in the value of a student-directed inquiry model but only when it is facilitated by a teacher. Students today are very used to multi-tasking, are easily bored and distracted, therefore leaving them alone to “discover knowledge” without direction is not a good idea. This would especially be the case for those students who need scaffolds and differentiated coaching or assistance. As educators, we cannot assume that all students learn in the same fashion or rate but must always offer them a variety of ways to achieve and be successful.

All in all, I do gravitate toward one method or another depending on what I want the student to learn. Therefore, my teaching style is very versatile depending on the situation, student, or concept that I need to teach. I would coordinate the different types of educational software depending on what I needed to accomplish at the time and the best approach to teach such concept(s).

Kaiser Family Foundation Study

The Kaiser Family Foundation study was a real eye opener for me especially the number of hours that kids spend using non-academic technology like cell phones, texting, video games, and Facebook. I know that kids today are well immersed in technology and are often referred to as "digital natives" and I think that as educators we can tap into their love of technology to enhance their learning in the classroom. Kids today can multi-task better than most adults and learn about technology with better ease than adults. However, as I mentioned in a previous blog post, (January 27, 2010: New York Time's Education section called If Your Kids Are Awake, They’re Probably Online), I do not believe that such multi-tasking and full technological immersion is all that good for kids especially when it affects their education both personal and academic.

Human beings are social beings and need human interaction in order to grow spiritually, emotionally, intellectually, etc. People often use personal social interaction, body language, and social cues to better understand themselves and others. Through social interaction people tend to learn about compassion, empathy, love, trust, and kindness. What I fear most about people's technological immersion is that people may be losing their perspective on what is "real" and becoming less sensitive to the issues of the "real" world. I do not believe that what we need to be fully human, good, honest, kind, compassionate, and respectable citizens, mothers, fathers, daughters, and sons can be learned through artificial media and technology. Like everything in life, kids need balance and I believe that only through balance will we all become better human beings. What I believe to be missing from the excessive use of non-academic technology among kids today is the human factor that allows for personal sociability and growth.

In terms of educational technology, I am all for technology in the classroom as long as it is appropriate. I do not agree that educators should incorporate technology just to include it in the curriculum and wow parents and school boards. Educational technology should support the curriculum, state learning standards, and enhance student learning. I believe that kids today must be exposed to technology but they also need to learn how to interact with others on a personal level that does not involve a computer if they are to become tomorrow’s leaders.

Sources:

Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds. A Kaiser Family Foundation Study. January 2010. http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf