Started this discussion. Last reply by lorir Oct 9.
Replied Jul 14
Started Jul 3
Posted on May 27th, 2008 at 2:23pm —
Posted on April 23rd, 2008 at 5:56am —
Posted on April 15th, 2008 at 12:03pm — 23 Comments
Posted on January 29th, 2008 at 6:51pm —
Posted on January 24th, 2008 at 7:07pm —
Posted on January 22nd, 2008 at 8:45pm —
Posted on January 22nd, 2008 at 8:31pm —
Posted on January 22nd, 2008 at 8:14pm —
Posted on December 12th, 2007 at 9:01pm —
Posted on December 11th, 2007 at 5:59am —
Steve Hargadon
created this social network on Ning.
© 2008 Created by Steve Hargadon
Comment Wall (66 comments)
You need to be a member of Classroom 2.0 to add comments!
Join this network
Seems to work here..
TBH
I went to your blog about the Digital Equity Interview: Bonnie Bracey. The pages come up with just the comments, no blog text. I hit reload and got the same thing. Hummm....
-Alix
But since this was a statewide presentation...I just thought I would put out what was presented..
grin
You made me chuckle.
Thank you.
Nellie
Thank you for invite! I´m in!
:-)
Sylvia (follow me here!)
Sharon
Maybe this was the same message that I received, but didn't bother to read.
My comment is that the voices saying that Ed Tech funding is off base have always been there...especially in the silence of teachers who were afraid to speak out against the wasted expenditure on Ed Tech.
Not that the equipment that was purchased wasn't quality, but that the equipment reached old age and hung around as senile equipment for years past its refresh time...underused.
The problem is that Ed Tech folks never bothered to show...
* How we can increase student achievement with this stuff
* How we can measure that increase
or,
* How this stuff decreases the amount of work that teachers have to do
In addition, the technology budgets were out of whack!
Too little funding was allocated for identifying exactly what technology integration would produce, and too little funding went to show exactly what gains student made in learning that they could only have made by using the technology.
Too little funding was allocated for teacher professional development, and almost nothing was allocated for building the back-end infrastructure and programming that would automate technology use by teachers and students.
In short, until definitive, replicable student achievement; directly related to technology produces measureable curricular content area results...attributable to technology...there will always be murmuring.
And teachers will address these issues in silence, and in stonewalling the extra work that integrating the technology takes...work they undertake without an expectation that students will learn more by using the technology.
I address some of these issues in an upcoming newsletter article, and I intend to address them further at NECC Open Source programs.
I also have a set of online Technology Integration Web links pointing to the reasons for the "Failed Technology Integration" history that we anguish over.
Check out:
http://www.edubloggercon.com/NECC+2008
View All Comments