Author: grabe

I continually struggle with the reaction against technology in schools. I am less certain of research support for integrating technology using existing ways of assessing student learning than I am of a feeling of certainty that computers and the Internet are simply a basic part of life. I am of the opinion that education works best when it is authentic and sensitive to the realities of daily life.

I watched UND play basketball last night. It was billed as possibly the last ever meeting between the two major North Dakota universities. NDSU has decided to move the entire athletic program to division I and UND has decided not to make the same move. Like most major athletic rivalries this has become a part of life for all in the region. The transition has been the source of great controversy. Changing levels is difficult because of the need to find a suitable conference and the demands for significantly more revenue. NDSU wants to continue playing UND because the in-state rivalry would generate a good deal of money and of the need to find enough opponents to fill out the yearly schedule. UND is not interested — the inequity of playing teams with more scholarships available has to be considered when competing for national titles. Anyway, the presented situation has added a little more zest to what may be the final games between old rivals.

UND does have one Division I sport. For some reason, you are allowed to play division I hockey without having D I teams in other sports. This is a unique situation – UND has won the D-I national championship 7 times (I think) and has been at the top of the national rankings for the past 12 week.

Anyway, back to the common applications of technology. I am at the basketball games with Cindy and I say – “You know what would be really cool? What if during half times (there is both a women’s and men’s game), they put the Internet feed from the hockey game up on the jumbotrons. It would be cool to show some REAL division I sports.” Sure enough, at half time, they start running the feed from the Internet hockey broadcast through the giant stadium video systems. I guess great minds, or at least that “adolescent fan thing” in all of us work in the same way.

In the long run, it might not have been the best idea. UND lost two to Wisconsin and will not be at #1 next week.

Then I am at church this morning and the pastor starts his sermon. For some reason, he hauls in his office computer and a projector system and fires up PowerPoint.

Cindy and I start laughing – people give us funny looks. I starting looking around for some paper and fishing in my pocket for my “field pen” so I can take notes. Then we both automatically begin evaluating his style – needs to learn to use bullets, too many words in each heading, needs to locate the spell checker.

“You know,” Cindy says. “It is interesting to consider PowerPoint in a different setting. I think I actually have a better idea of the points he is trying to make. So many people complain about PowerPoint and we make fun of it, too. It does help make the main ideas easier to pick up.” We better stop whispering.

Let’s see – what was the point? I remember the message was about recognizing your “calling?” “What really matters to you? What are the things you keep coming back to? It is the commitment as much as the success. Follow your passion!”

I agree.

The Wikipedia is an attempt to create a multilingual, free, and accurate open source encyclodedia. Students may enjoy exploring the heavily linked articles. Strange as it may sound – you are invited to contribute.

Stateline.org reports that states are beginning to protest NCLB because the expectations are not matched by suitable resource support. The article focuses on Ohio, but also recognizes concern raised in several other states (including North Dakota).

Several individuals on listservs I follow have recently been focused on what they perceive as efforts to end hands-on learning. Educational Psychologists may also have encountered a recent article in the American Psychologist by Richard Mayer – “Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?” (2004, 59, 14-19).

First, I do not read standards to exclude some student-guided work. In fact, I would argue that standards require students participate in some tasks that require decision-making, problem-solving, critical thinking, etc. I also think Mayer is correct in suggesting that allowing students to flounder about without guidance (scaffolding) is largely unproductive. I hope this issue is merely a matter of balance.

I have been reading Todd Oppenheimer’s The Flickering Mind. I do make the effort to read the various books (e.g., Cuban, Healy) that argue against the use of technology in schools. I will likely have more to say on this particular book at a later point. Until then, additional material on this position can be found at EdTechNot.

I am having a difficult time getting a good focus on the main ideas of “The Flickering Mind.” There are similar themes in many of these books – inefficient use of meager resources, diversion of teachers and students from core goals of education, lack of good data demonstrating technology is really effective, commercial pressure, etc. I have yet to determine from Oppenheimer’s anecdotes which or all he believes are core problems.

Arguing from anecdotes is something we all do. We tend to find or selectively recall those examples that fit the case we want to make and ignore those that stand in opposition. Actually, if we are skilled, we use some of each, but make certain the number favoring our position are far more numerous.

The problem with equipment breakdowns is one example of a potential technological problem. Some equipment does break down. However, it is difficult to determine how often this happens and why.

I have not had personal problems with computer hardware and so accepting the position that equipment is unreliable is difficult. Because I like to work on the “newest” thing, my real problem is what to do with the past generations of equipment. Multiple generations of the computers I have used accumulate under office tables and in store rooms. Some have been passed on to acquaintances willing to work with older equipment.

On a table in my office is the server I first used to gain personal experience in Internet applications. I turned this machine on in 1995. It has run with the exception of an hour here or there, the week they turned off the power because of the Grand Forks flood of 1997, etc. ever since. Year after year it rolls on (nearly a million pages served last year). I have several “used” machines waiting to replace the old “work horse”, but the machine simply refuses to quit. I have decided not to ever replace this machine as long as it still runs – it is kind of a loyality thing. If the machine can last another 10 years, we will simply retire together.

The machine on the right is the server (the “pizza box” design is a 6150/66 Power Mac still running system 7.6). In contrast, the machine on the left is a G5.

The U.S. Department of Education terminated AskERIC on Dec. 19. Educators Reference Desk to continue some services of the abandoned AskERIC. It appears that some interactive services (Ask ERIC) will not be available, but the database of lesson plans and connections to online information have been salvaged.