Comments - OK, Now I'm Mad.. - Classroom 2.02024-03-29T15:41:22Zhttps://www.classroom20.com/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=649749%3ABlogPost%3A2870&xn_auth=noThe writer of the article sho…tag:www.classroom20.com,2012-09-11:649749:Comment:8736022012-09-11T21:49:38.675ZDanahttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/Dana50
<p>The writer of the article should have waited until the test results were released because the information was incomplete. Making an article for millions to read should be 100% sure that all the information is accurate. This is whats wrong with the media and for that matter the politics system which in my opinion is the problem like NLOWELL said. </p>
<p>The writer of the article should have waited until the test results were released because the information was incomplete. Making an article for millions to read should be 100% sure that all the information is accurate. This is whats wrong with the media and for that matter the politics system which in my opinion is the problem like NLOWELL said. </p> When the powers that be judge…tag:www.classroom20.com,2010-03-28:649749:Comment:4550442010-03-28T13:56:39.175ZKathleen Pepinhttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/KathleenPepin
When the powers that be judge effectiveness of any edu tool, they don't look at the fact that the kids still have to make choices, and they are often empowered from above to choose not to learn. In our school system, if a student passes by the end of third quarter, he can fail the fourth quarter and the final. So wasting 1/4 of the year is approved for those that make that choice. The up to date tech tools help put more interest out for these kids, but a number of them still will not put in the…
When the powers that be judge effectiveness of any edu tool, they don't look at the fact that the kids still have to make choices, and they are often empowered from above to choose not to learn. In our school system, if a student passes by the end of third quarter, he can fail the fourth quarter and the final. So wasting 1/4 of the year is approved for those that make that choice. The up to date tech tools help put more interest out for these kids, but a number of them still will not put in the focus to learn.<br />
When I first came to MD, the school I was in at the time had the philosophy that "the student has the right to fail". Ok if you mean you don't have to give him the passing grade if he doesn't earn it, but it was stretched to mean that if the kid is free to not do the work if he doesn't want to and you can't hold him accountable except for his grade, and then teachers were held accountable.<br />
<br />
My language students where I am now overall do well, but there are always those who "don't need the credit" or the community college they're going to doesn't require them to pass language class. This all needs to be taken into account. I use a lot of technology, and you can't blame it on technology for those students who choose not to do work. It's amazing how most reports…tag:www.classroom20.com,2009-05-16:649749:Comment:3425502009-05-16T06:58:09.165ZJoseph Ramanairhttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/JosephRamanair
It's amazing how most reports make such conclusions after studying elementary and secondary classes in 132 schools. The effectiveness of educational technology is a context specific argument. While it may not work in those 132 schools, it may work in another 250 schools! And, not everything (software, hardware etc) should work! Some aspects may work, while some just don't. It is more often the case that educational technology is used to replicate existing practises which naturally results in…
It's amazing how most reports make such conclusions after studying elementary and secondary classes in 132 schools. The effectiveness of educational technology is a context specific argument. While it may not work in those 132 schools, it may work in another 250 schools! And, not everything (software, hardware etc) should work! Some aspects may work, while some just don't. It is more often the case that educational technology is used to replicate existing practises which naturally results in student achievement being no better in the high-tech classrooms than ones without the new products. It's bad when you pour old wine into new wine skins! Silvia,
I love your post. Wh…tag:www.classroom20.com,2009-01-13:649749:Comment:2614872009-01-13T12:44:04.304ZAntwon Lincolnhttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/AntwonLincoln
Silvia,<br />
<br />
I love your post. Where are you now after read the article? Have you or your site done anything differently since the publishing of the report? I am also concerned about the implementation of technology. It is another of <a href="http://www.classroom20.com/forum/topics/education-technologys-dirty">Education Technology Dirty Little Secrets.</a>
Silvia,<br />
<br />
I love your post. Where are you now after read the article? Have you or your site done anything differently since the publishing of the report? I am also concerned about the implementation of technology. It is another of <a href="http://www.classroom20.com/forum/topics/education-technologys-dirty">Education Technology Dirty Little Secrets.</a> My suspicion is that someone…tag:www.classroom20.com,2008-12-06:649749:Comment:2297572008-12-06T04:43:56.857ZDavid Weeshttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/DavidWees
My suspicion is that someone realized how expensive it was going to be to equip all of the federally funded schools in the US with the proper infrastructure to support digital learning advances. I'm a bit of a cynic, but I'm beginning to believe that federal government research follows funding, rather than the other way around.
My suspicion is that someone realized how expensive it was going to be to equip all of the federally funded schools in the US with the proper infrastructure to support digital learning advances. I'm a bit of a cynic, but I'm beginning to believe that federal government research follows funding, rather than the other way around. The articles were actually wr…tag:www.classroom20.com,2007-04-07:649749:Comment:33202007-04-07T15:47:12.573ZSylvia Martinezhttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/smartinez
The articles were actually written a day before the study was released, so there must have been a press release announcing the results. The news reports were simply going from the press release, which had incomplete information. As willing as I am to condemn the press for missing the story, this was not their fault.<br />
<br />
This page http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20074005/execsumm_tech.asp<br />
explains how the products were chosen. They go on to say that in year two they may have the individual products…
The articles were actually written a day before the study was released, so there must have been a press release announcing the results. The news reports were simply going from the press release, which had incomplete information. As willing as I am to condemn the press for missing the story, this was not their fault.<br />
<br />
This page http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20074005/execsumm_tech.asp<br />
explains how the products were chosen. They go on to say that in year two they may have the individual products singled out. I'm not sure I see a complete promise to do that, it's worded sort of elliptically.<br />
<br />
The study does list the names of the companies and software products. I'll put them in a new blog post, it's kind of long for a comment. I posted about this on my blo…tag:www.classroom20.com,2007-04-07:649749:Comment:32922007-04-07T13:19:30.046ZCarolyn Footehttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/Technolibrary
I posted about this on my blog as well.<br />
<br />
I was frustrated by how they buried the names of the companies in the article(last paragraph) . And I agree, the "summary" is somewhat meaningless because perhaps LeapFrog's software did quite well, while Pearson's was completely ineffective. You can't really make any judgment about it without knowing more.<br />
<br />
I believe the article said that the basis for the companies participating in the study was that the individual results wouldn't be released.…
I posted about this on my blog as well. <br />
<br />
I was frustrated by how they buried the names of the companies in the article(last paragraph) . And I agree, the "summary" is somewhat meaningless because perhaps LeapFrog's software did quite well, while Pearson's was completely ineffective. You can't really make any judgment about it without knowing more. <br />
<br />
I believe the article said that the basis for the companies participating in the study was that the individual results wouldn't be released. Also that seems questionable. <br />
<br />
The whole "measurement" movement is based on so many faulty uses of statistical data in the first place that it shouldn't surprise me. It's just dismaying to know the distinctions and have it enter the mainstream news the way that it will, with such broad brush strokes. Yeah, you are right. I'm comp…tag:www.classroom20.com,2007-04-06:649749:Comment:31802007-04-06T22:18:27.881ZSylvia Martinezhttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/smartinez
Yeah, you are right. I'm compiling a list as we speak from the full report. But I bet you could guess quite a bit of the list off the top of your head - big publishers, big products, big promises.<br />
<br />
PS I'm a big fan!
Yeah, you are right. I'm compiling a list as we speak from the full report. But I bet you could guess quite a bit of the list off the top of your head - big publishers, big products, big promises.<br />
<br />
PS I'm a big fan! If I had to guess, I'm guessi…tag:www.classroom20.com,2007-04-06:649749:Comment:31792007-04-06T22:08:07.942ZChris Lehmannhttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/chrislehmann
If I had to guess, I'm guessing that many of the packages "measured" were curriculum specific packages. As Sylvia mentions, let's see what happens if they were to measure schools that were using the tools for research, production, collaboration, communication and presentation.<br />
<br />
As long as we use these tools to merely recreate the same pedagogy that created the factory / banking model of education, we *won't* see any change, not in test scores, not in engagement, not in learning.<br />
<br />
We finally…
If I had to guess, I'm guessing that many of the packages "measured" were curriculum specific packages. As Sylvia mentions, let's see what happens if they were to measure schools that were using the tools for research, production, collaboration, communication and presentation. <br />
<br />
As long as we use these tools to merely recreate the same pedagogy that created the factory / banking model of education, we *won't* see any change, not in test scores, not in engagement, not in learning.<br />
<br />
We finally have the tools to let us achieve the promise of Dewey, let's start using them that way. <br />
<br />
(And yes, I'm preaching to the choir.) :) Sure. and Wes Fryer just post…tag:www.classroom20.com,2007-04-05:649749:Comment:29802007-04-05T22:06:48.897ZSylvia Martinezhttps://www.classroom20.com/profile/smartinez
Sure. and Wes Fryer just posted on his blog some links about research that makes better distinction between the kinds of software and the pedagogy supporting use. http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2007/04/05/good-teaching-with-technology-does-make-a-difference/#comments
Sure. and Wes Fryer just posted on his blog some links about research that makes better distinction between the kinds of software and the pedagogy supporting use. http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2007/04/05/good-teaching-with-technology-does-make-a-difference/#comments