Even this morning, I heard about a new edtech company called Knewton. As students answer questions related to just about any curriculum, Knewton uses the student's right or wrong answers to project at which level the student is working and how to keep pushing them forward. If the student is not understanding the concept, Knewton keeps lowering the skill level and eventually starts looking at what key concepts the student may be lacking and reteaches those missing key concepts that are keeping the student from moving forward. Sounds great, right?! Knewton promises to give every student individualized instruction. No more teaching to the middle. But as soon as the Knewton founder was finished talking, another edtech intellectual questioned the very idea of such technology and pointed out the flawed logic behind all of it. My point is -- it's hard to know what is going to be truly useful to us as educators. That's where ISTE comes into play. Using a set of international standards to help us evaluate tech in the classrooms is incredibly vital in a time when it's difficult to gauge what is the best tech to help our "students be prepared to succeed in an ever changing world," if you will.
When considering the presentations from class and looking at the ISTE standards, there are a few presentations that stand out to me.
Tammy McManis's 30 Hands fits just about every ISTE standard. Through making videos, it allows students to be "creative and innovative." It also is a great medium to help students "collaborate and communicate." Making videos is inherently communicative in that students are communicating a message. There are multiple ways a teacher could use 30 Hands collaboratively. "Critical thinking" also plays a role with the 30 Hands app. Students are making a video to meet an educational goal. They are answering questions and solving problems as they create. 30 Hands also promotes "digital citizenry" in that it is creating a safe and positive way for students to interact, teach, learn, and share. Finally, "technology operations" also plays a role in this edtech as students must figure out how to use the app to produce a product.
Using ISTE to evaluate Language Arts Friendzy gives us a way to view how useful this edtech on the classroom. I don't really see how LAF is meeting the "creative and innovative" requirement in that it doesn't really require students to create anything. However, LAF does a great job of helping students develop "digital citizenry" in that it gives students a safe environment to communicate and play against other students across the world. The best thing about the LAF is that it meets the "critical thinking" standard. Students are forced to think on their feet and solve problems as they play learning games. Finally, LAF does a good job of fitting the "technology operations" standard in that kids must apply prior knowledge of other technology to use technology effectively and productively.
ISTE is a great way to take a closer look at all of the tech that is available to us. In a sea of new tech, how do we responsibly make choices that will give us the most bang for our very limited bucks? ISTE is one way to do just that.
awesome! Thanks! The 30Hands project was a hit with students and parents. I highly encourage each of you to play with it and try to find a way to use it in your class this semester!
ReplyDeleteI am with you on the 30 hands being an incredible tool. I just have to figure out how to use it in a choir setting :)
ReplyDeleteUsing ISTE to evaluate technology used in the classroom really does make you think about what is useful and meaningful and what is just fun and engaging!
ReplyDeleteGood rhetoric again. Between ISTE and the media (which you point out a bit), there is good vetting in place for Ts and As to make smart choices.
ReplyDelete