Donna+Brunnquell+Exposition+Paper+2

Following is a position paper to school administrators who are interested in putting student learning online, but feel the best way to go about it is to subscribe to online textbooks and commercial online reading comprehension packages. In order to approach this paper in a meaningful manner, I have chosen to relate the information to the 2009 New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards for Technology.
 * Introduction**

For the most part, the attitude of society today is one that expects our children to graduate from school with the skills to function in the workplace and become “successful.” In accordance with this view, we often hear educators state the ultimate goal of their profession as helping students become “critical thinkers” and “lifelong learners.” However, what does this really mean for our students? The skill set necessary to succeed in the workplace has dramatically changed, making it critical for students to be tech savvy problem solvers and proactive thinkers. “One important goal of media education should be to encourage young people to become more reflective about the ethical choices they make as participants and communicators and the impact they have on others” (Jenkins et. al. 2006, p. 15).
 * Position**

With respect to technology as it relates to our school curriculum, it is prudent to first examine the 2009 New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards (NJCCCS) for Technology as well as the 2009 test scores for fourth and eighth grade students in New Jersey. It is imperative that we examine the mission and approach to our technology standards in order to ascertain whether we are, or are not meeting the intended goals. Furthermore, we would be remiss if we did not consider the validity of the 2009 standards as they relate to a curriculum we are considering for the 2011 school year. The NJCCCS for Technology profess; “Technology is uniquely positioned to transform learning, to foster critical thinking, creativity, and innovation, and to prepare students to thrive in the global economy. As engaged digital learners, students are able to acquire and apply content knowledge and skills through active exploration, interaction, and collaboration with others across the globe, challenging them to //design the future// as envisioned in the statements that follow. **Mission**: //Technology enables students to solve real world problems, enhance life, and extend human capability// // as they meet the challenges of a dynamic global society. //// ” //

// In theory, the standards are admirable, however, upon closer examination, the standards for technology do not provide the “how” and “why” to support 21st century learning.The standards refer to digital learning games by citing //// Alice //// and //// Lively ////. //// Alice //// is a program designed to expose students to computer programming with the intent to promote careers in computer science. Randy Bryant, Dean of the School of Computer Science at Carnegie-Mellon University is featured on //// Alice //// ’s website ([]) as a supporter of this program, “ //// Alice //// uses an ‘entertainment oriented’ approach to reach females and other underrepresented groups.” Wanda Dann, Associate Professor of Computer Science at Ithaca College, goes further as she professes the positives of this program, “Girls are often not turned on by frustrating details of things like Java. They enjoy the storytelling side of //// Alice //// .” As is the case with many commercial programs, these statements indicate a built in bias within the program. Although //// Alice //// does provide a space for students to create games and 3-D animations, it does so with a bank of preprogrammed words and pictures that students drag into their work, “making sure the student never makes a mistake.” Clearly this is not learning. //// Lively ////, on the other hand, was written into the 2009 standards yet this program was launched by Google in July, 2008 as an experimental space where people could gather in virtual worlds. The experiment, //// Lively ////, was closed by Google in December, 2008 yet it still remains a part of the standards today. //

// We need to go beyond the standards to provide students with the guidance to use a wide variety of technology and apply their learning to real world experiences. The real world shows us that although New Jersey test scores are consistently above the nation’s average, on an international level, there is cause for alarm. Scores for U.S. students are lagging. The 2006 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), places fourth graders, for example, at 18 of the 45 countries participating in the test. Even more disturbing, is the evidence that 31 of the 45 countries improved reading scores between 200l and 2006, while U.S. reading scores dropped by two percent. //

// These statistics lead to the crux of issue at hand; will online textbooks and online commercial reading comprehension programs yield the results we are focused on achieving or will they serve to lead our students through the motions of using a computer without engaging them in authentic, interactive learning? Consider the lessons learned from Philadelphia’s School of the Future before deciding to gravitate toward commercial programs as the answer to learning with technology. //The 2006 opening of the School of the Future in Philadelphia, a project supported by Microsoft, was intended to provide students with the tools that would enable them to achieve greater success by addressing their learning from a more ‘real world’ approach. Despite positive student feedback, analysis of the facility’s success is difficult due to the wavering support of Philadelphia’s Board of Education. “The school’s messy path to reform has included leadership instability, wavering commitment from the central office to its mission, swings in curricular approaches, technological glitches, and challenges in meeting the academic needs of a mostly disadvantaged student population” (Manzo, 2010, p. 22). The students received the tools but not the leadership to facilitate true learning. As educators we need to ask ourselves, do commercial online textbooks and reading comprehension programs truly fulfill our objectives as stated in the standards whereby students are mandated to //apply content knowledge and skills//?

// Student learning in the 21st century needs to be much more than reading and playing commercial games online. Miners and Pascopella (2007) point to the fact that 21st century skills “[They] require the ability not just to ‘read’ but also to navigate the World Wide Web, locate information, evaluate it critically, synthesize it, and communicate it—all skills that are becoming vital to success in this century’s economy and workforce” (p. 27). Student learning must be a collaborative, interactive experience that relates to the world outside of the confines of school. Learning with technology must incorporate an array of media and must have the full commitment of the administration if it is going to foster authentic learning. Learning within school must translate to the outside world in which students are expected to succeed. As noted by Knobel (2001), “Focusing solely on school literacies at the expense of literacies that students practice out of school is for many students a grave injustice because it invalidates those literacies in which they are fluent and effective out of school” (p. 405). //

// A deeper level of learning is achieved when students are engaged in practices and language that are familiar to them. In school students can use technology to stimulate deeper learning as they, for example, publish their work online, create photo essays, digital stories, podcasts, or PowerPoint presentations with voiceover narration. Socially outside of school, students are continually texting, researching, and staying connected. Often referred to as “digital natives” their communication takes place continuously and “on the go” so why not look at learning as continuous and “on the go”. For instance, lessons accessible via podcasts are available to students at any time of the day or night and are instantly available if students want to connect one subject to another or refer back to something they may have learned in a previous class. Podcasts allow great flexability for both the teacher and the student. Teachers can supplement their lessons with innumerable easy access resources. Mobile handheld devices, Smartphones, or iPods provide a great deal of latitude for teachers and students. Remember that handheld devices are a natural part of most students’ environment today and offer a familiar tool. They make student work portable and easily acccessible. Both Apple and Microsoft offer great latitude to teachers and students, providing tools to help students enhance communication and collaborative learning skills. Applications and resources are available to foster engaged learning while at the same time making it fun and rewarding. Although it features Apple products, the following link provides examples of ways in which handheld devices can foster an interactive classroom and school environment: [|http://www.apple.com/education/why-apple/ - kick-start]. TeacherMate is another handheld device that allows teachers to customize lessons for each individual student, providing them with the opportunity to work at their own pace. This device allows teachers to connect technology directly to the curriculum mandated by the school district and offers the capability of tracking the progress of each individual student. The following link provides an overview of the program: // [].

Before buying into commercial software that marginalizes student learning, it would be advisable to review the hurdles our students must overcome in a 21st century classroom and give strong consideration to alternatives that might better serve our children. Clearly, on an international basis, test scores demonstrate that U.S. students are not the leaders. If teaching practices, school environment, and mandated curriculum have not served to position our students at the top of the list, it should be evident that changes are needed. Taking a commercial curriculum that has failed to engage our students thus far, and putting it into computer friendly format will do more harm than good. Susan Patrick, president of the North American Council for Online Learning reminds us, “Online learning is not this separate silo that we might need to use as a tool.” We will be stifling learning, ignoring the sociocultural needs of our students, and fooling ourselves into thinking that we are leading our children to a deeper level of understanding if we do not take a realistic approach toward implementing the instruction, techniques, and strategies that prepare our students for the future. Turning on computers does not equate to turning on students’ minds.

References Apple Education. Retrieved May 28, 2010 from // [|http://www.apple.com/education/why-apple/ - kick-start] // Carnegie Mellon University. (2010). Alice. Retrieved May 28, 2010 from [] Jenkins, H., with R. Purushotma, K. Clinton, M. Weigel, & A. Robison (2006). //Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st// //Century//. Occasional Paper. Boston, MA: MIT/MacArthur Foundation. Available from: [] Knobel, Michele. 2001. “I’m not a pencil man: How one student challenges our notions of literacy ‘failure’ in school. //Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy//. 44(5): 404-419. Manzo, Kathleen. 2010. “School of the Future: The Promise of Technology and Change Falls Short.” //Education Week//. 29 (5): 18-22. Miners, Z., Pascopella, A. 2007. “The New Literacies.” //District Administration//. 43 (10): 26-34. New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards – Technology. Retrieved May 27, 2010 [] TeacherMate. Retrieved May 29, 2010 from [].