Technology is the main ingredient…NOT the main course.

Today I read a really great article for my class. It’s called From Compliance to Commitment: Technology as a Catalyst For Communities of Learning. It’s by Mary Burns, a program associate with the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory in Austin, Tx. (At least she was at the time the article was written in 2002)

Looking at the date and thinking of how quickly obsolete ideas about technology can become, I was a little leery as I began reading. By the time I hit the third page of the article, I’d broken out my highlighter and was bleeding yellow all over the place! Wow!

The basic premise was technology training for 160 teachers on low performing campuses. Technology training was implemented with these teachers and they saw real growth and improvement not only in student performance but instructional strategies as well. And the best part of it was the WAY they did it….without focusing on technology!

They (the facilitators) focused on learning – the technology was a tool to help teachers learn to work together, to collaborate to accomplish the task or assignment given them. They had to try, fail, collaborate, ask questions, get frustrated, succeed….on their own – with guidance from the facilitators – who were strictly hands off! I love it! I really love the fact that Burns admits that the teachers HATED it at first. They couldn’t throw up their hands and surrender the mouse (and the learning) to their teacher. They had to push through, help each other, find answers. Isn’t that what we all want for our kids? For our professional development?

The training provided was multi-curricular, not focusing on any one content area, and not overshadowing the assigned task with too much “tech” training. The teachers weren’t becoming experts in the software – they were becoming comfortable with practical application of the software as a tool for completing an assigned task.  I was clapping my hands, stomping my feet, and doing the happy dance big time! Woot! This is what I believe in…this is what I want to bring to those wonderful teachers with the terrified looks in their eyes the moment anyone mentions technology. This concept of technology as a catalyst for learning, rather than the OBJECT OR POINT of the learning is what I want to give to those grouches who can’t find anything nice to say (and who REALLY should follow their mom’s advice about what do do when you can’t find anything nice to say!).

My “got-it-from-a-vendor-booth-at-TCEA” highlighter poised…I read on. The teachers received 6 seperate trainings each year for a total of 36 hours (for 2 years). The facilitators supplemented this training with monthly, on-site visits to each teacher’s classroom. Okay – probably not logistically feasible for me considering my teacher-to-Kim ratio is 762 to 1…but still nice that they followed up. After all, don’t most teachers complain about drive-by professional development.

Teachers were trained in environments that replicated their classroom constraints – so they had to group up around the computers. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard “I can’t do that, I only have 4 computers in my room. I need a lab.” You’ve heard it…right? Hold that thought, ‘cuz we’re coming back to that baby with a vengeance later.

Every activity that the teachers participated in was a modeled, experiential activity that placed them in the same role as their students in the classroom. (Love it when we practice what we preach!)

What they found was that the expected outcomes that they went into the study with proved to be not exactly what occured…Here are some of the high points of the article…

1. This study found that the more technology proficient a teacher was, the less learner-centered the technology use was.  The “focus on cultivating minimal skills proved instructionally efficient.”  So many times when we train we try to help our teachers be experts so that they will be able to teach their students what to do. Instead, this study focused on making the teachers feel comfortable, both with what they knew and with their ability to work through what they didn’t know.
2. Freed of the pressure of being an “expert,” teachers were more likely to be open to learning from others and from students. This transfer of autonomy spread to other areas of the classroom as well, curriculum and instruction, classroom management, etc.
3. You need 1-to-1 environments to really integrate technology…uh nope. The study found that classrooms (labs) that had 1-to-1 saw the students more engaged individually with the technology than with each other collaboratively. The students in labs worked cooperatively but NOT collaboratively. Grouping requires students to work together to find solutions. (No – I’m not saying 1-to-1 is bad…just saying that it is not necessarily the holy grail of technology use)
4. By not limiting yourself to one content area while learning technology, you encourage teachers to think outside the box. Spreadsheets can be used in English and blogs are great in Math! Interdisciplinary units help teachers to see technology as tools to manipulate data – any data – rather than ancillary tools for a specific content area.
5. As students begin to rely on each other for ideas and strategies – and technology for data collection, manipulation, and presentation – teachers become facilitators.
6. Modeling the desired teacher (and student) behavior during professional development helps the teachers learn how they learn – and by taking that model into their classroom, they are more empathetic to their students’ while giving their students the same opportunity to learn how they learn.  The focus shifts from how much a teacher can teach to how much, and in what ways, learners can learn.

And my favorite quote from the article…

Though technology was not the main course in our professional development approach, it was the main ingredient, woven throughout most activities. Its power rested not in its instrumentality – its capacity to deliver information instantly, to solve problems, or to communicate. Rather, the technology served as a vehicle for ‘learning about learning,’ a mirror in which teachers could see reflected their best practices for learning and teaching.” (pg. 302)

I love it when I get to read something that aligns with what I believe (albeit better organized and far more eloquent). It’s encouraging to see someone have success where I have not…because it makes me believe that it’s possible.

Burns, M. (2002). From compliance to commitment: Technology as a catalyst for communities of learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(4), 295-303.