But two principles underlie these fantasies:
- The folks that want sky-high change for the better expect to accomplish this with budgets as low as a worm's arches
- For idea that we support, adopt, implement; other choices, other options, other paths cannot be supported, adopted, implemented or taken
So, for example, even if there were unlimited funding; students cannot conduct research on the Internet, play the tuba and quarterback for the football team at the same time.
Students can integrate some things, such as the report that contains science, social studies, English, math and health concepts.
But, the Techies that propose the ideal "school of the future" seem to believe that technology can enables multi-task-learning.
Let's see, maybe the quarterback can have a heads-up display in his helmet (no pun intended) that allows satellite Internet access when the defense is on the field. And, maybe tuba practice can be virtual note-reading and fingering for a midi-enabled handheld keyboard that is stored in his or her shoulder pads during the time that the offence is on the field.
Of course, the old-fashioned football coach would object because he insists that the quarterback pay attention to the on-field action, and, keep his or her "head in the game."
No Shortage of Ideas
Although technology…
- Devices
- Networks
- Applications
have yet to become interoperable and scalable enough, or powerful enough to meet Technology Integration goals; advocates can free to dream that these (not yet easy enough) tools might make a positive impact on education.
The biggest dream (fantasy really) is that the various school district stakeholders are going to agree to focus upon technology…and agree to get things done.
What things? you ask.
Here are the important factors, as Techie Idealists see them:
- Engaged, Independent Student Constructing Knowledge
- Performance-Driven Administrators
- Collaboration-Driven Teachers
- Leadership and Continuous Improvement
- Technical Support
Of course, in this fantasy, everyone would amass such a high level of technical expertise that training and professional development will cease to be a necessary part of the Technology Plan.
Sidebar
These fantasy excursions into possibility thinking are not new. Apple™ proposed such ideals a score of years ago with the Apple™ Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT) program.
And this was when computers used floppy disks and when the most powerful Apple™ computer was the Apple™ Laser Printer. Today's technology is "light-years" ahead of the primitive equipment of yore, but still not easy enough to use.
If Technology is the Focus, are People Important?
As amazing as it sounds, Techie's implicit trust in technology leaves people defined in limited and traditional roles. These roles include:
- Teacher
- Student
- Parent
- Community Member
- Administrator
- Policy Maker
- Technologist
So, what is missing from this list?
- Thinkers
- Artists
- Planners
- Caretakers
- Healers and Therapists
- Entertainers
- Farmers
- Mechanics
- Factory and Production Workers
- Service Sector Workers
- Financial Professionals
- Law Enforcement
- Military
- Engineers
- Technicians
- Skilled Artisans
- Entrepreneurs
…the roles and ideals that teachers see as a desirable future for their students.
Learning consists of more than attitudes, knowledge and skills. Performance and execution are important learning components.
But, equally important are problem-solving, decision-making, cooperation, collaboration, creativity and communication.
So are kindness, love, poetry, the appreciation of peace and beauty, patriotism, and a belief in democracy.
Technology is an important "half-truth" that must support education as a an invisible (transparent) tool; but by itself, technology offers little more to education than a skillet offers to the meal. Maybe the skillet makes preparing the meat easier than poking the meat with a stick and holding it over a fire, but neither the skillet or the stick constitute the meal.
Why Technology Folks can't Talk to Teachers
Techie folks face a handicap when they pitch technology solutions to teachers.
That handicap is that the Techies talk "Techie Talk."
But teachers have little or no interest in "technology for the sake of technology." And, "Techie talk" seems like foreign sounding, suspicion-provoking, confidence-shattering noise to teachers.
Techie folks are so enthralled by the specifications and features of the latest "breakthrough" devices, upgraded software, or "socialized" Web service that they fail to notice that these "specifics" leave teachers cold.
There are several models that we can apply to analyze this communications collapse, i.e.,, the Techie folks might just as well be "talking to the walls."
The Neuro Linguistic Programming Rapport Model
One model that stretches our understanding of the non-functional communication dynamics between Techies and teachers is the Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) concept of rapport.
In the NLP Model, "Rapport" means more than just getting along. Rather, it means something like, "being on the same wavelength."
On the level of interest, teachers are focused on instructional management, classroom planning, measurable learning outcomes...and performing well enough to keep their jobs.
But Techie folks drone on about all the neat and nifty tricks that hoop-jumping software and paper-tiger-taming Online services can perform. Great! Except, what teacher cares?
Besides, teachers are sophisticated enough in the use of technology to know that this "three-ring" hot-shot stuff always takes more time than it saves; and that "doing it the old, tried and true, no frills, just-get-the-job-done" methods require no new technology, and no new learning curve.
The "Person Like Me" Model
The other model that explains the "dynamic discontent" between Techies and teachers is the "Person Like Me" Marketing Model.
With this model, marketers explain that relationship, trust and influence are produced when people come to believe, "This is a person like me" (and all that such a belief might mean to a specific person), "and if they say that the product is great, I believe them."
However, when Techies speak "Techie talk" to teachers, the unconscious, visceral (even below conscious awareness) belief that bubbles up is, "This person isn't hearing a word that I am saying, this person isn't describing anything that is important to me, I don't understand anything that this person is saying; so why should I trust anything that they are saying?" ("The Techie is not like me! Everything that they say is suspect.")
"Besides, even if this technology stuff were to save time for me over the long run, in the short term, it will take more time than I have right now."
"And, I don't know if what the Techie says is true, anyway. And even if it proves to be true, the Techie wouldn't know because nothing that I hear from him has the least bit to do with instruction."
Summary
Techies cannot effect change in education because they do not talk "teacher talk," i.e., instructional language. And, Techies fail to be sound believable to teachers because they eschew instructional jargon in favor of speaking technical lingo.
And while technical lingo is fine as a shorthand way for Techies to communicate to each other; "Techie talk" leaves teachers feeling uneasy, suspicious and resistant to the Technology Advocate's ideas...no matter how useful or potentially relevant.
The solution for this dichotomy is for the Techie to learn to talk "teacher talk" and for Techies to listen to teachers as though teachers have something important to say.
If the Techie would bother to listen, then learn, then speak teacher jargon; teacher's would begin to trust Techie communication.
But, if Techies listened and developed relevant solutions for teachers, they wouldn't be pushing technology. They would be improving instruction.
"Improving instruction by ignoring technology and focusing on student achievement," now that is an idea that teachers can "sink their gnashing teeth into."
