When taken to their root, arguments against incorporating technology into the public education system often can be expressed as one of two barriers: 1) there is not enough research data to prove the effectiveness of technology as an education tool and 2) the cost is too high. Accordingly, when countering these arguments, technology enthusiasts offer two standard rebuttals: 1) but we KNOW it works, just look at what the kids are doing and 2) but $499 ($249 for PC users) isn't THAT much money. Neither of these arguments really stand up well within the current combination of standardized testing and depressed economic conditions. However, there is legitimate reason for the lack of research detractors of technology crave to have and hope for overcoming, or at least significantly diminishing, the barrier of cost when considering the addition of technology to the curriculum.
Real research, rather than the "find five sources about this in the library or online and include them in a paper that summarizes information" assignments so often portrayed as research within State Standards and classrooms across America, is extremely difficult when applied to examining the impact of educational technology on classroom teaching and student learning. In fact, real research in education technology is nearly impossible because real research requires the results pass the test of reliability. Additionally, research must not only be replicable but also repeated before accepted by skeptics.
I am not stating that previous educational technology research is not replicable but I will state that there often is no real point in replicating a previous study that examined a specific technology when, at the time of publication, the technology may already have been supplanted by a new technology. Indeed, who today would research The Impact of Windows Based Operating Systems on Teacher Self-Efficacy and Pedagogical Practice. Who would compromise your control group, DOS users. Do current teachers even remember DOS?
Additionally, many detractors of educational technology want percentages, statistics and other numbers that can be graphed to demonstrate proof of student gains. Such numbers usually come from Quantitative Research, favored by supporters of standardized testing (Want to challenge this statement? Name one member of Congress that does not unintelligibly quote statistics like they are ordering their favorite menu item). As expressed above, such research is rarely feasible leaving supporters of education technologies to rely on Qualitative Research, the kind that is often viewed as lesser research by the skeptics. Thus we are left with the unfortunate reality that Quantitative Research, the research least likely to be used when examining the impact of educational technology, is what is required to overcome the rabble rabble rabble of naysayers and detractors, is just not feasible.
Why should we provide all students access to an iPad? Why not? Oh yes, the $499 price tag. Why do we need iPads? Why not buy a PC or Android based model? Because we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all tablets are not created equal, that why. True. But listen up Mac fanboy (or girl, I'm and equal opportunity aggravator) there are alternatives out there that are not an iPad, but that is exactly the point. Look, iPads are cool. They have multi-touch, apps for everything, good battery life and so on. But there are many alternatives that do more for much less. For example, aWindows based netbook is around $249 (quick math, 1/2 the price), has the same size screen, a kid friendly typing experience, enough battery life to last a normal school day, and uses software and cloud applications that allow for greater independent and creative thinking than most apps (by the way, most educations apps are far from free) which tend to provide a singular or very limited prepackaged experience.
But what if your school really wants a tablet? Audrey Waters posted information about a new $35 tablet ($70 when not subsidized by the Indian government) from DataWind Ltd. The tablet does not do all that iPad does but it does much more than either the Kindle or Nook. It is a reader, can access the Internet, allows you to read and write e-mails, and has Apps (not directly from the Android Market but Apps none the less). This new tablet is not free but considering the reader functions and the increased availability of e-texts, the up front cost of the unsubsidized $70 version would still have a near immediate payoff. This tablet is capable of completing many of the same tasks of both netbooks and iPads at a fraction of the cost making them a viable potential educational tool for between 1/4 and 1/7 of the price of current technologies being purchased by the schools.
Most detractors will probably not be swayed by my words. In fact, many probably haven't made it this far into my post because they are already actively searching for research or opinion that offers refutation to my information. Good! While they search for additional information, the techies will continue to find new ways to effectively use and implement new technologies.
No comments:
Post a Comment