Letters to the Editor
L&L welcomes your feedback. Send
letters
to Kate Conley, editor, kconley@iste.org.
Dear Dr. Moursund:
We are teachers, parents, school administrators, and
district
office staff at four U.S. Department of Defense Dependent Schools in
central
Germany. As part of the GIFTED committee (Giessen Infusing Technology
Every
Day) meeting, we discussed your editorial “A Typical Student in
2016”
in the December/January issue of Learning & Leading with
Technology.
It generated a lively discussion around how this new technology would
affect
education, student learning, and the art of teaching. We would like
your response
to some of our comments, concerns, and questions.
Many of our comments related to the effect on students.
Concern
was expressed for the limited face-to-face social interactivity. We
wondered
if this would create a wider gap between the haves and have-nots where
the most
motivated students would no longer attend a traditional school. How do
we ensure
that poorer communities receive the same advantages as the more
affluent? We
felt that many students would benefit from a more teacher-centered
environment
and face-to-face contact with their peers, while many students, living
in isolated
locations or in small schools, would benefit from this new technology.
The advantage
of having access to teachers and courses worldwide opens up amazing
possibilities.
For many years, educational technologists have predicted
that
the role of the teacher would change from presenter of information to
a facilitator.
Some questions arose out of our discussion about that shift. Were the
Personal
Tutor and the Statistical Consultant people or technology? What is the
relationship
with the Personal Tutor and the Statistical Consultant with the
teachers around
the world? Finally, and very important to this committee, how do we
prepare
teachers for this role?
Another area of discussion was around curriculum. We had
many
questions about who determined the curriculum? Did this student attend
a “school”?
We noticed she received a scholarship but who pays the teachers? We
felt that
15 years is too short a time for a world curriculum to evolve given
that the
European nations cannot agree on the implementation of the EURO much
less a
common curriculum for their students.
We felt that other roles would also have to change. We
see parents
as having a much larger role in monitoring their student’s
education. The
community would have to provide much of the social interaction for the
students.
We wondered if this is realistic especially in light of the present
inequality
of advantages offered between the rich and poor.
It was interesting that very little of the discussion
focused
on the technology. We did feel that wireless communication was very
important
if this scenario was to happen. Most of us accepted the technology you
described
to be within the bounds of reality. What we questioned was the
possibility of
educators making these drastic changes in how we operate.
Tara Beau (tara_beau@eu.odedodea.edu)
and colleagues
Educational Technologist, Hessen District
Giessen, Germany
by e-mail
Moursund’s
Reply
I want to thank all of you for your use of and insights
into my
brief article. One of the main purposes of the article was to promote
the type
of discussions and responses that occurred within your group. The real
issue
is not whether the ideas in the scenario might occur in approximately
15 years.
Rather, the real issue is the effects of such an addition to the
world’s
educational system.
In the past few years, many people have suggested that
the rapid
pace of doubling of hardware capabilities and of telecommunications
capabilities
would be ending shortly. However, the pace of change has actually
quickened
in recent years, and it now seems likely that projections based on
Moore’s
Law may prove to be too conservative.
As you know, distance learning is expanding very
rapidly. Some
companies that are getting into this business are serving as brokers
or “middle
people” for the various developers and teachers of these courses.
Such
a “virtual school” has the potential to serve students
throughout
the world. A broker can assemble a huge set of courses and arrange
them into
many different curriculum configurations. Thus, a single company could
offer
programs of study in many different countries, each curriculum being
designed
to meet the standards of a particular country.
One of the issues you raised is how a change in the
amount of
face-to-face instruction might affect the social development of
students. In
the scenario that I presented, I placed special emphasis on this
aspect of Saundri’s
life. Thus, I am not concerned for her. More generally, however, any
major change
(such as a change that is due to technology) tends to have both
positive and
negative effects. Typically, some people benefit more than others.
With information
technology, for example, we have the “digital divide.” In
addition,
we have some schools stressing higher-order, problem-solving aspects
of information
technology, while others focus on use of an integrated learning system
or edutainment
software.
One purpose of the scenario is to encourage people to
think about
who might benefit—and who might not—from various types of
changes
brought about by the use of information technology in education. What
would
it be like to be a student and never have face-to-face meetings with
your fellow
students? What would it be like to be a teacher and never have
face-to-face
meetings with your students? What would it be like to have a
computer-based
intelligent tutor and advisor? As you think about such questions,
think about
how you are preparing your current students for adult life in a world
in which
these types of changes are occurring.
Dave Moursund (dmoursund@iste.org)
PEA
and Beyond
Dear David:
I was intrigued about the future you so creatively
developed in
the December/January issue of Learning & Leading with
Technology.
This picture is most fascinating, and I feel that you are on target.
Students
like Saundri will find that they can best be served when their
education co-exists
with their lives. All too often in the past, students have been
subjected to
courses that do not supplement their lives.
The personal education assistant (PEA) is possibly the
best reason
to hope that our educational system becomes truly interactive. Saundri
(and
her contemporaries) uses the resource to make her learning up-to-date
and most
certainly personal. In the past, it has been difficult to personalize
education.
I was also happy that she has the input from her classmates and her
teachers.
The contact with students and teachers is important. Although this
contact is
in cyberspace, she still has the opportunity to discuss and submit her
work
to all those involved in her education.
Your picture of the future is certainly most positive
and exciting.
Let’s hope that by 2016 all will be well with the world.
By the way, in 2016 I will be 68 years old and, I hope,
retired.
My only hope is that those entering the profession will see the impact
this
picture has on their peers and their students.
P.S. I am glad that you didn’t call the personal
education
assistant “PEA-Brain.”
Ken Zelasko (Kenneth_W._Zelasko@interact.ccsd.net)
English Teacher, Durango High School and Community College of Southern
Nevada
Las Vegas
(by e-mail)
Note: letters may be edited for length or style.
Back
to Letters Page
|
