Rethinking Education: Chapter 3

     It was interesting to read about the technology enthusiast's point of view last week and see how it compares with the technology skeptics point of view this week. In the reading, I found this quote to be interesting, "The school system relies on common and well-tested technologies. The basic material tools for schooling are paper, pens, pencils, and chalk...Blackboards and overhead projectors provide cheap ways to support teacher explanations and sharing work"(p. 33). This statement is very interesting. At some point the schools must have integrated overhead projectors (at some point in time they did not exist). If schools could integrate the use of pens and overhead projectors, how come they cannot now integrate newer, better, more efficient technologies? Perhaps it is the cost, but I think that schools should analyze the overall year-to-year benefits that will come with the integration of newer technologies. I do not think that all schools and all teachers should be forced to integrate new technologies into their classrooms, but I do believe that teachers should be educated on what new technologies are available; Teachers should then decide whether or not these newer technologies will be beneficial to their student's growth and learning.
     I understand that technology, such as computers, can be expensive, but I really do believe that the benefits that come along with technology (especially in a technology world) far outweigh the initial cost. I think that the ideal situation would be if every student had a laptop that they could use in their classes, which would eliminate a cluttered room and a lack of computers for all students. Since most schools do not provide computers to their students, I think that the next best thing would be to give the students plenty of time to finish their work; If you have your students make a blog, you could give them a week to get the assigned writing done, so that all students would have an equal opportunity of getting to a computer and completing the assignment.
     I found some of the arguments against technology integration to be quite trivial. To say that computer usage in a classroom would be too noisy, I think, is quite absurd; There is plenty of noise in a general education classroom already, without computers. I think that the noise that comes with computer usage is beneficial noise, because it is the noise of students learning. Another argument that the skeptics have is that computers decrease student's scores for writing with pen and paper; I think that this statement is probably true, but by saying this the skeptics are not really proving that computers are horrible pieces of technology. I think that computers allow students to process their thoughts more quickly, even if their ability to write quickly and efficiently on paper is diminished. I think that in a world where professional writing is done with computers, students should be encouraged to write with a computer, rather than a pencil and paper. 
     I agree with the skeptic's argument that computers should not replace teachers, since teachers are unique and provide their students with many things that technology cannot; Rather than technology replacing teachers, I think that technology/computers should be used to help teachers give more effective lessons. As a teacher, I hope to encourage my students to use technology. I will try to integrate technology use into my classroom by giving my students ample time to complete their assignments that require the use of technology.