Isn't all technology educational?

I've been thinking about Tim Stahmer's thoughtful post "Do We Really Need 'Educational' Technology" over at Assorted Stuff. Tim asks:

Does the artificial classification of hardware, software, web applications and the rest as “instructional” (with the inevitable conclusion that rest of the stuff is not) just get in the way of the basic idea that almost any technology could be used for learning?

When anyone asks what our school's tech department is responsible for, I usually respond, "If it beeps, buzzed, or takes batteries, we're responsible for it." And at some level, that's actually pretty accurate. Our department supports everything from entry door card readers to online textbook supplemental materials to student laptop carts to the district's finance and HR systems. And since this stuff is all part of the school environment, couldn't it all be classified as "educational"?

This year's three "big" projects in my district could all be considered "educational," but in somewhat different ways.

• Big IWB project (educational in the sense that it is a tool directly used for instruction)
• Switch to GoogleApps for staff (educational in the sense that staff use the product to create materials, communicate with parents, students and other staff, and plan their own professional activities)
• Select and install a telephone system (educational in the sense that the business infrastructure that helps run the organization is mission critical to educating kids)

I prefer the term "instructional" technology if, like a computerized reading program or specially designed device is really only used for teaching and learning. Yes, cell phones, word processors and even computers themselves can be labeled "educational software." But that's a bit like calling fire a communication technology because it can be used to send smoke signals.

Regardless of what we call it, I agree with Tim that all technology can be educational, even, as Will Rogers observes, electric fences.

__________________________________

On a tangentially related note, I've been reflecting on how ironic it is that the more directly tied to curriculum and instruction, the more difficult "educational technology" is to implement. A new student information system, network architecture or even e-mail system, while complex, is a walk in the park compared to introducing new software, hardware and methodology into the classroom on a systemic basis.

Here are a couple areas I think our district really needs to move on, but with which I seem to get no traction for a district-wide plan:

• Individual computing devices for student use - netbooks, laptops, iPads/iPods, etc. I am in awe of Scott Newcomb's Mobile Learning project website and the great work Eden Prairie (MN) is doing in this area. (If I can find info online, I will link to it.)
• Online classes and district-wide approach to creating hybrid learning environments. How do we help teachers see opportunity instead of threats here?

My observation is that successful instructional uses of technology adoptions start with dedicated classroom teachers, departments or even buildings - NOT with technology departments.

But that doesn't mean tech folks (or anybody) should stop sharing exciting technologies, applications and methods. You never know when a spark might catch fire!

Comments

[Nathan]

We've brought in a ton of iPod Touches in Special Ed with Stimulus money this school year. Monday we visited another school that was hosting a site visit, to check if we were missing anything. The key thing I came away with that day is it is ALL about great instruction. The 7th grade math teacher we observed was inspiring...and made me wonder if we had anyone that dynamic in our district to really extract all that technology has to offer in the classroom. To be fair, they might not have another teacher like him in their district. I felt good knowing we weren't behind the curve and ahead of pretty much all the other districts there, but worried that we might not have the players to pull it off. The Yankees do well because of Mark Texiera and CC Sabathia win games...not the grounds crew, the GM or the owner. While you can put the pieces in place, get the best stuff in the buildings, the people working between the lines get the job done. We have two SMART Tables sitting unused right now because the teachers in that building "didn't want them." I've seen some great things this year, and some pretty sad things too. It goes back to Scott McLeod's last few lines of his TEDx talk - (paraphrase) we could become dangerously irrelevant if we don't change how we do things.

[Steve Johnson]

I'd take it a step further and say that not just technology, but everything on the planet is educational- it just takes imagination to find it.

[Ann]

Well said, Steve.

Regarding Doug's comment about online courses: we have one teacher currently teaching an online hybrid math course. Her students meet one day per week in the classroom; all other work and communication is online. This was implemented, I believe, partly because the teacher wanted to integrate online learning tools, and partly because our school's plans involves being prepared for a pandemic or other situation where a large number of students would not be able to physically make it to our building.

[timstahmer]

Thanks for the comments (and the link), Doug. We have some of the same problems with our school-based trainers in that, since their title includes the word "technology", people expect them to manage, fix and know how to use anything that plugs in the wall. While we try to keep them focused on the narrower but more difficult process of integrating all the tools into the learning process, it's hard to say no when something doesn't work.

We also are struggling with the idea of allowing students to bring their individual devices to school. Unfortunately, much of the discussion so far has been around the impact on the network and the usual what happens if they do something "inappropriate" topics. The more important issue is how will it impact teachers when every student has a communications device and how should their classroom practice change. That's going to be far more traumatic to a school than snow network connections.

[Custom Essay Writing]

Hi,
I' will go with Steve, but not only imagination, practicing is also a great tool for leaning. The instructional IWB project is an educational technology that is intended to instruct students. The rest 2 are supporting tools. answering to your last point, when technology is combined with dedicated classroom teachers it will give brilliant results. And if this formula is applied from the beginning, you cannot imagine how it will work for you. Precisely defining all technology can be educational depending upon its usage. CEW

[Doug Johnson]

Hi Nathan,

Thanks for leaving this thoughtful comment. As you know, I gave a little reaction in a subsequent post. I appreciate having you as a reader and commenter!

Doug

Hi Steve,

And sometimes it's more educational than we'd like it to be!

Doug

Hi Tim,

You are welcome for the comments and link. You KNOW I am a long time reader and fan of your blog. I don't always have (or take) the time to comment there as I should. Thanks for your comment!

I think the personally owned device war is over. Parents settled it by insisting kids have access to their cell phones in school. Once that door is open, the horses are out of the barn! To me the bandwidth issue is a red-herring - you can always use a packetshaper to allocate bandwidth.

But yes, I've been suggesting that it is not "disruptive" but "distractive" technologies that we be the real change agents in education. It's going to be hard keeping a kid's attention focused on the front of the class when the real world and real education is going on on the device in his hand! No easy answers here.

Thanks again,

Doug