It is funny, when I think back to when I was in high school....which wasn't that long ago :) "Computers" was a class. I believe we learned the basics, had typing tutorials (thank God, as I know how to type), but there wasn't any curriculum from other areas integrated. I guess back then, just using a computer was the technology.
Now, I think sometimes the basics are forgotten and we jump right to the advanced lessons. I still have students ask me how to get on websites....not even knowing what the "E" for Explorer is. I have stopped taking for granted that all students know their way around a computer. I have also stopped assuming that all teachers know how to incorporate technology into their teaching of content/curriculum in a meaningful, effective way....hence the image above.
For lack of trying to say this better myself, I have included a quote from a website I found very helpful in understanding TPACK. "True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator). Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components." ( http://tpack.org/tpck/index.php?title=TPCK_-_Technological_Pedagogical_Content_Knowledge)
I just thought this was very helpful and I thought I would share :)
(image from http://tpack.org/)
Posts
I've gone back and forth on this issue over a long time. I agree th at it is best to have an educator be skilled with content, pedagogy and technology. I run into relatively few who have all three facets and it is so often the technology piece that is weak. It creates a challenge when two of the areas are strong but one is weak to teach them as an integrated whole.
ReplyDeleteOne question -- do you think that technology needs to be taught along with the content? Would the same technological approach be taught several times -- repeated for each content area? I've heard criticisms of methodology classes that they are redundant. How might that be avoided?
I do like the notion of integrated teaching. In fact we have toyed with the idea of taking a studio approach to our own program, where all of our content would be taught in a single large class. We would weave it all together. It's difficult to do, but something I would love to give a try.
I so wanted to answer this question sooner, a 20 page paper got in my way :)
ReplyDeleteI think this is a great model for teachers to be aware of. I too don't run into many people that are skilled in all three sections. It is a lot to know!!
Part of my position this year is to work with teachers in helping them integrate technology into curriculum. There are 18 other AISI teacher in my district and we do lots of PD and help share the information we learn. It is actually a pretty neat position.
We work with this model a lot and try to see how we can best reach the end goal.
Ideally I like the "weaved" approach. I do think it is necessary to introduce the technology, teach how to use it, then integrate it. I think it is more about the teaching than the technology....if it weaved in. I look at technology as a way of making learning more exciting, engaging, and meaningful.
I think if you focus on "computer class" it could easily get redundant.
I think it is something that is an on-going challenge too. Some student and teachers are really comfortable with technology, so you can do more. Some are just at beginning levels,therefore you are limited to what you can do.
It is a challenge :)