Laptops in College Lectures

Referenced Article: W. Joseph Campbell, “On Laptops in the Classroom, and Technology-Driven Myths,” Media Myth Alert Blog, March 9, 2010. Accessed October 30, 2011.

http://mediamythalert.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/on-laptops-in-the-classroom-and-technology-driven-myths/

            So far in my blog, I have examined the influence of social networks and technology in the classroom and their potential involvement in future education. While some classrooms use social networking and cell phones to keep students engaged, other school systems feel that technology is a distraction that will not add to a child’s learning experience. Even today, schools in America range from traditional, technology-free curricula to blog-based learning programs. Today, I’ve decided to take a look at technology in the classroom through the opinions and experiments of college professors. More specifically, I am looking at the role of laptops in lecture after reading W. Joseph Campbell’s 2010 blog about student media distraction. He writes in one of his posts about an experiment in which a professor shared false information with his lecture students in order to see how quickly they would spread the “fake news” via laptops.

            Campbell’s blog discusses his own laptop policy: as a professor at American University, he opens his first class by asking his students not to use laptops in his lectures. His policy “dates at least five years” and “rarely receive(s) pushbacks” as it is enforced strictly from the first day. He further notes that “laptops have never been mentioned” by students in their evaluations of his course. Campbell references a  Washington Post article that similarly argued that laptops are more of a temptation than a help in the classroom. After becoming so advanced and commonplace among college students, laptops have begun to “compete with the professor for the students’ attention.” Campbell even argues that laptops promote discourtesy among students, encouraging them to “be so dismissive” of their teachers and peers, even in discussions. Perhaps the most powerful part of Campbell’s article is his reference of Professor Peter Tague’s experiment at Georgetown Law School. At the beginning of a lecture (with laptops), Professor Tague announced that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts had suddenly retired. Near the end of class, when Tague announced that his information on John Roberts was false, the rumor had already reached “RadarOnline” and “the DrudgeReport”, a now viral piece of information that had been spread solely through the social media of Professor Tague’s students.

            Campbell’s blog presents an unusual perspective for my own studies on the future of technology in classrooms. Laptops have become so advanced and common among students that professors are increasingly inclined to ban them from their classes. The distraction of a laptop hinders the professor’s ability to teach material and allows students to disengage from important course information. Further, students do not seem to miss their laptops when they instead take notes by hand. Professor Tague’s experiment proved quite clearly that even students of graduate level education are tempted to distract themselves with social media such as Twitter, blogging, and Facebook while in lecture; they are so involved in these networks that a piece of unconfirmed news managed to go viral within one lecture period of just one group of Georgetown students.

            Does this mean that future classrooms will, in essence, have less technology than today’s classrooms? Campbell’s argument convincingly shows that laptops are a distraction and take away from student focus in a lecture. The answer lies in each professor’s ability to cope with the distractions of technology. A room filled with students and their laptops will, in general, encourage students to focus less on the professor’s words; however, these students will also have the opportunity to maintain typed notes and potentially use the Internet as a resource in class. While I don’t expect laptops to completely disappear from classrooms, I believe that the theory behind banning them from certain lectures is strong, and that students do pay more attention when handwriting their notes. I look forward to seeing how the role of laptops continues to change within my own life and classroom experiences.

Silicon Valley, and No Computers

Referenced Article: Matt Richtel, “A Silicon Valley School That Doesn’t Compute,” New York Times, October 22, 2011. Accessed October 23, 2011.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silicon-valley-technology-can-wait.html?pagewanted=1&src=un&feedurl=http://json8.nytimes.com/pages/technology/index.jsonp

             After two weeks of looking at schools with high technology, I have decided to take an alternative approach this week and look at schools that lack technology in their classrooms. Are the students learning? Can they perform well on tests? This week’s post is still a study of technology in the classroom, yet in a more unconventional form: many of the students at the Waldorf School of the Peninsula are children of important figures in the technological hub of Silicon Valley. The Waldorf school, however, is also unique because it embodies a technology-free learning environment. There are no computers in the classroom, and it is encouraged to keep computers out of the children’s homes. Although I am very interested in the absence of technology at the Waldorf school, I am more struck by the conscious decision of many technology-driven businesspeople and innovators to send their children to a school without even a desktop in sight. Perhaps the most interesting part of this article is that, after I was struck by its information, I realized that it was researched and written by the same author of the article in my first blog post. The perspective is entirely different, and the information equally compelling on the topic of an extremely different form of education.

            The students at Waldorf Peninsula include children of parents working at “Google, Apple, Yahoo, and Hewlett-Packard.” Surprisingly, these students’ most common materials, even at middle school levels, are “pen and paper, knitting needles, and, occasionally, mud.” Located in Silicon Valley, the Waldorf School attracts parents of students who want to see their kids complete grammar school without the aid of technological products like cell phones that are so common in their workplaces. Alan Eagle, working in “executive communications at Google” with a “computer science degree from Dartmouth”, sends his children to the schools because of what he has seen in his own workplace; he owns both an “iPad and a smart phone”, even though his children use neither. The Waldorf philosophy is that student learning should not be influenced by the technologies that exist in so many classrooms throughout Silicon Valley and the United States. They even admit that their students would potentially have difficulty taking early level standardized testing because of the school’s nonstandard curriculum. An impressive “94%” of Waldorf students do attend college, and some at impressive schools such as Stanford University. In the view of Waldorf supporters, “technology is a distraction” and “engagement is about human contact,” two important components of the Waldorf philosophy that have shown at least a respectable degree of success thus far in the classroom.

            At the same time, others would counter this viewpoint with the belief that children need to keep up with today’s technology in order to pursue jobs in the same line of work as their parents, or maintain an active role in today’s society as it increasingly depends on social networks, Internet news, and communication via cell phones. Even though students may find distraction in today’s technology, they can also use it to their advantage as they pursue learning with the influence or even integration of their new tools.

            The Waldorf Peninsula School is a testament to the existing ideology that technology is not always a benefit in the classroom. Even people who know a great deal of information about technology are not always in accordance with the belief that it should be integrated into a child’s life at a young age. Unfortunately, even the school itself encounters difficulties with maintaining this ideology. One important way to learn about the Waldorf School is via Internet, and the school does operate and maintain a professional website, even though its students do not see it. I am interested in learning of someone’s firsthand experience at the Waldorf School, and comparing it with the more technological education that I experienced as a child. I do not think that there is an answer yet as to which method of learning is better, but I am very intrigued by the concept of having a non-technological school in the technological hub of today’s society.  

Facebook and Cell Phones in Class?

Referenced Article: Greg Toppo, “Social Media Find Place in Classroom,” USA Today, July 25, 2011. Accessed October 16, 2011.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-07-24-schools-social-media_n.htm

            In my last blog post, I wrote about the mixed feelings towards advanced technology in classrooms. The Kyrene School District had allocated money in its budget for increased technology, but its schools were disappointed to learn that district test scores had not shown any sign of numerical improvement. This prompted me to think about how technology could be used in more beneficial ways in classrooms. Although the Kyrene District was not pleased with technology’s effects on student performance, I feel that the true problem was that the district did not yet learn how to appropriately use technology as a teaching tool. Technology is an integral part of modern society and should be used as a tool for furthering traditional knowledge instead of taking away from education time. This conclusion encouraged me to look for an example of technological success in the classroom, as shown in Greg Toppo’s article “Social Media Find Place in Classroom.” This article contrasts Matt Richtel’s article (from my first post) with a view of more positive integration of technology as a learning tool.

            Toppo writes of the use of social networks in New Jersey’s New Milford High School under the leadership of principal Eric Sheninger. While most school systems stay away from cell phones and Facebook in the classroom due to potential distraction from traditional education, Sheninger has instead brought social media into the classrooms in full force. The school communicates regularly with students and parents through its own Facebook page, students use cell phones for activities such as poll voting in class, and students and teachers “research write, edit, perform, and publish their work online.” Why encourage so much social media in high school? Sheninger says “kids are coming to us bored, [and] disconnected.” Using media like Facebook encourages students to remain engaged in learning.

            As a student myself, I am struck by Sheninger’s attitude toward the boredom of students in the classroom. Students often lose focus after hours of lecture, but they can also distract themselves with texting or Facebook for impressive amounts of time. When the two are correctly merged in a classroom setting, they have the potential to keep students from feeling like school disconnects them from their outside lives. Facebook is becoming a social necessity, and its presence in the classroom can encourage proper use of social networking sites. Letting students of today’s generation bring social media into their learning environment helps them bring their own personality into the classroom.

            Where are the drawbacks in Sheninger’s plan? Toppo’s article argues that the most pressing reason to keep social media out of the classroom is the risk of encountering “irrelevant or offensive material.” In reality, I think the problem stems from the heightened risk of distraction. Unless there can be specific filters on cell phone and Facebook functions, the two promote activities such as conversation with friends during class time. This problem can be solved by ensuring that Facebook and cell phones are used to thoroughly engross students in learning new class material. The first crucial step in keeping students engaged in learning is, in the ideology of Sheninger, being able to relate to them through their current social media.

            Like anything in a school environment, social media presents risks and may lead to some distraction; however, its increasing role in the lives of today’s students makes it more and more understandable that social media could potentially shape future education. New Milford High School has taken a bold step in the direction of future technology in classrooms, and I look forward to hearing about the school’s progress in the next few years as it continues to work with social media.

Technology Hindering Test Scores?

Referenced Article: Matt Richtel, “In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores”, New York Times, September 3, 2011. Accessed October 7, 2011.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/technology/technology-in-schools-faces-questions-on-value.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all.

            Computer technology is quickly becoming a necessity in classrooms across America and in many parts of the world. Laptops, iPods, and Internet resources are nearly as common as textbooks in numerous schools. I am opening this blog with analysis of the New York Times article that inspired me to pursue a more formalized study of this increase in classroom technology. “In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores” by Matt Richtel provides thought-provoking, factual information regarding the general impact of technology on students’ testing performance and considers the role of computers in classrooms.

            The Kyrene School District of Arizona invested “$33 million” in innovative technology for its Arizona classrooms, encouraging middle school students to use blogs and Internet media as primary learning sources. With the aim of “turning the teacher into a guide instead of a lecturer,” the program focuses on digital skills that were previously unavailable in the area’s learning facilities. After adapting to this new technological teaching style, the district learned that its students’ test scores had not improved despite its innovative technology. Aside from these scores, the increased budget for technological resources left teachers without raises, lessened the budget for text books, and increased class sizes by several students.

            While the mediocre test scores of students are not sufficient research to show that technology hinders student performance and learning, there is also a lack of research convincing the tax-paying parents of students to fund technological programs. Although technological literacy seems important, its focus in the classroom comes at the cost of time previously spent on handwritten exercises, art, gym, and other common school activities.

            As a measure of intellect, test scores focus on several particular areas of student learning and development. Testing arithmetic, writing, and comprehension, standardized exams do not consider the technological literacy of the students taking their tests. Richtel’s article implies that the “stagnant scores” are a direct result of the time lost to technology; however, technology may not be the problem at all. Technology should be used as an amelioration to classroom material instead of replacing routine areas of classroom study. Computers and Internet can be integrated into classrooms as learning tools and aids in the study of areas including math, writing, and comprehension. Computers have the ability to “enable, motivate, and inspire” students by familiarizing them with the rapidly changing technology of the 21^st century without taking away from their learning experiences.

            The degree of success of these technologies depends greatly on the teachers and schools committed to technology-based programs. If math is taught through computer activities in addition to the standard practice of written problems, isn’t it still practice in arithmetic? Stagnant test scores may not be a reflection of the problems with technology, but instead a signal to schools such as those in the Kyrene School District that the methods by which they use technology may not yet have reached their highest degree of efficiency.

            The concerns in this article regarding the test scores of students provoke yet another thought: are test scores the only way to determine the success of students in the future? While standardized testing is crucial in measuring fundamental areas of learning and improvement in school districts, other areas of study can be equally important for tomorrow’s generation of leaders. Suppose a technologically proficient class of students received the same scores as the students of a traditional, textbook-based class; the former would produce students who are more equipped to handle the rapidly changing technology of the future. Knowing how to operate a computer and make use of Internet resources will carry a student much farther in higher level education and the working world than a notebook and pencil. The challenge, then, lies not in the harm of technology in the classroom, but instead in the teachers’ ability to maintain students’ test scores with more advanced teaching methods. As a student proficient in technology at the college level, I strongly believe that resources such as this blog are invaluable components of my education as a young adult. I hope that schools continue to integrate technology into their classrooms, ensuring that they balance it with traditional learning to help cultivate a technologically literate generation for the future.