EDTECH Portfolio /Laurana Alves

My Final Thoughts-551

Laurana Alves — Sat, 07 May 2011 05:14:57 +0000

1. As you look into your future career, how will the skills and knowledge you acquired in this course be used? In the future I hope to go into a career where the primary focus will be to deliver education to places often neglected, such as poor countries. I hope to secure funding both from government(s) organization and private groups in order to this. The skill I have learned this class have helped me understand the grant proposal process much better. I may not end up being the grant writer per say, but I will be able to participate in and guide the process with a clearer vision.

2. What skills and knowledge from other courses in this program were useful in completing the projects in this course? My grant project was an idea that I developed in one of the first classes at Boise State. My other courses have helped me tie everything together and has helped with many of the technical requirements of the 551, i.e. building a website.

3. In what ways have your attitudes, your confidence levels, your understanding of needs in education changed? It has helped me look at the overall delivery of education. I’ve realized that it is not black and white; there are many shades of gray when it comes to delivering education.

Thoughts on staff development

Laurana Alves — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 23:29:44 +0000

Not being form an education background, it is difficult to assume what teachers may need in the area of staff development. The readings seem to point to a disconnect between what is genuinely needed and what is actually taking place. One problem I see is mandatory hours for technology training that do not fit the teacher’s subject area. An assessment of what technologies are realistically used in each teacher’s subject area could be a solution. Another problem is outdated training requirements, Burns (2008) illustrates this in the following example, “in the late 1990s, I worked in a school district in which teachers, in order to become â€œcertifiedâ€ in technology skills, had to matriculate through two three-hour sessions in PowerPoint. I recently checked the district Web site only to discover that eight years later the two-three hour sessions are still required for PowerPoint certification” This problem could be eliminated with periodic or annual reviews of staff technology training requirements.

Burns , M. (2008, August 22). Just use It: rethinking technology training for k-12 teachers . Tech & Learning, Retrieved from www.techlearning.com

Laurana Alves — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 00:30:30 +0000

Defining Educational Technology

Educational technology can be defined as the study and the practice of

facilitating learning and improving performance by creating, using, and managing

technological process and resources” (AECT 2004), simply put, the use of

technology tools and theories to assist in the learning course. Furthermore, “educational

technology can be characterized as a goal oriented problem-solving approach using tools,

techniques, theories, and methods from multiple knowledge domains” to design, improve,

and implement both human and technological tools effectively in order to advance

learning. (Luppicini, R. 2005 p.103)

Educational technology can be found in many sectors of society including K-12

schools, universities, corporations, and government. It is a necessary part of corporate

training, education, and government as the needs of the learner constantly changes.

One sector where educational technology is important is K-12. There

are a variety programs being designed and integrated in schools around the world.

An example of this is in the Thompson School District in Colorado, they have

successfully implemented an online school named Thompson Online, K-12. Thompson

Online “will be available 24 hours a day via an Internet connection for students who may

prefer their learning at 4 a.m., 4 p.m., or somewhere in between.” (Cabrera 2010) The

Thompson program could prove to be beneficial to “at-risk” students who may not be

able to continue in a traditional classroom setting.

Another example of educational technology in K-12 is the one laptop per child (OLPC)

initiative, the goal of the non-profit organization is

“to create educational opportunities for the world’s poorest children by providing each

child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop with content and software

designed for collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning.” (www.laptop.org)

This program demonstrates how an inexpensive redesign of an existing tool can improve

the quality of education for many around the world.

These two programs demonstrate the positive benefits of educational

technology in K-12 education. In fact a review of “219 research studies from

1990 to 1997 to assess the effect of technology on learning” found that “students in

technology rich environments experienced positive effects on achievements in all major

subject areas. (Schacter 1999) A study conducted in 1998 on the relationship between

educational technology and student achievement in mathematics found “that using

computers for learning games was positively related to academic achievement”.

(Wenglisnsky 1998 p.6)

Another sector that has seen positive results from educational technology is

corporate training. For example, Boston-based OutStart has developed software that

allows organizations to provide education and training material through the employees’

mobile device. This is a practical training solution for traveling or home-based

employees. A national company becoming multi-national will need to rapidly and

efficiently expand their training program.

We also see this reflected in government training and education.

When the U.S. Navy “wanted to move from group paced instructor-led training to self

paced, learner-centric approach” (OutStart Inc. 2009) the Navy’s NPDC

worked closely with a providers of training and education services,

instructional design, graphic design, programming, and program management, to help

implement the new initiative. This resulted 45% decline in training time, an $8-10

million savings, and 65% reduction of in-class time. (OutStart Inc. 2009)

The examples above demonstrate how educational technology has streamlined, improved

access, and increased cost efficiency in varies sectors of society.

Educational technology can be summarized as an area of continuous advancement,

constantly changing to meet the needs of learners and society.

REFERENCE LIST

Association for Educational Communications and Technology(AECT). (2004 ). The Definition of Educational TechnologyDefinition and Terminology Committee: Author.
Retrieved July 1, 2010 from http://www.indiana.edu/

Cabrera, R. (2010, July 9) Every day is perfect day for learning, The Coloradoan Retrieved July 9, 2010 from http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20100709 /LOVELAND07/100708031

Luppicini, R. (2005). A Systems Definition of Educational Technology in Society. Educational Technology & Society, 8 (3),103-109.

Naval Personnel Development Command Leads the

Revolution in Training with OutStart LCMS: Case Study U.S. Navy.(2009).Boston, OutStart Inc., Retrieved July 3, 2010 from one laptop per child, Mission Statement, Retrieved July 1, 2010 from http://laptop.org

Schacter, J. (1999). The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievement,
What the Most Current Research Has to Say [Electronic Version] Milken Exchange on education technology
Retrieved July 1, 2010 from http://www.waynecountyschools.org

Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does It Compute? The Relationship between Educational Technology and Student Achievement in Mathematics., [Electronic Version]. Educational Testing Service,1-41
Retrieved July 1, 2010 from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED425191.pdf

Reflection on the New Digital Inequities

Laurana Alves — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:22:19 +0000

The digital divide is a huge problem in many aspects of society. It is almost like a silent killer. It could pose a huge crisis in years to come. Not having access to the Internet now or in the future will create a sub-class of less informed, which will not be able to compete or survive in a technology driven world. This group is in its infancy, so the extent of the damage is not yet known. No access to the Internet means people will not have access to work, news, social services, and education.
The main cause of the digital divide is economics. The poorest in society have limited funds, so purchasing a computer is already difficult, never mind maintaining high-speed Internet service. Even though the cost has decreased over time, it is still difficult for the poor. ” In 1989, a personal computer cost approximately US$2,000, whereas today one can walk into most any electronics store and purchase a powerful machine for less than US$600—still prohibitive for the poorest Americans but much more accessible overall.”(Ching,Basham,Jang; 2005, p.395)
The cost decreases have not kept up with the growth of demand and reliance on Internet/computers. One solution would be inexpensive computer such as e-machines at even lower prices. Another option is some type of government subsidy for high-speed Internet service. I like the idea of free WIFI service to housing project, towns, or even sizable cities. I think the Internet has become such a big part of our daily lives that it should be a right for the less fortunate in society to have access.

References

CYNTHIA CARTER CHING,JAMES D. BASHAM, EUNICE JANG (2005).
THE LEGACY OF THE DIGITAL DIVIDE,
Gender, Socioeconomic Status, and Early Exposure as Predictors of Full-Spectrum Technology
Use Among Young Adults
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
URBAN EDUCATION, Vol. 40 No. 4, July 2005 394-411

Sarah Lai Stirland (04/04/2007). Muni Wi-Fi Powers Hope at San Francisco Housing Project. WIRED

Mark R. Fletcher (June 20, 2010). Walton completes WiFi project for the whole town Free Internet access will help residents with job search, education. Kokomo Tribune

Is the concept of the Digital Native from empirical research or from popular thought?

Laurana Alves — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:39:08 +0000

There are many definitions of Digital Natives, my general understanding is they are children/adult who are born in or spend most of their lives in the digital age. Alternatively, as Prensky puts it “Today’s students – K through college – represent the first generations to grow up with this new technology. They have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys and tools of the digital age.” (Prensky 2001) He also defines Digital Immigrants as older people who have had to adapt to these new technologies with varying degrees of success and always behind the Natives. I do feel there is a group of people who fall in between. I was born in 1977; technology came in my life in my early teens (early 90‘s). I quickly adapted, however, I did not have access to today’s technology (internet, email, etc) until I went to college. It was an easy transition once I got the hang of the concepts. Today I feel like a Native, but also an Immigrant because of my age.

I do feel there is definitely legitimacy to Prensky’s and other supporters of the Native and Immigrant argument. There is no way I can compete with a 14 year old when it comes to adapting to new technology. They have an understanding that takes me longer to grasp, even though I have technically more years of “digital” experience. I also see this difference between my father and me, even though we have been using the internet for the same number of years; he is unable to notice certain things that are second nature to me. For example, we both are able to use email and messaging equally well, but I pick up on spam or potential virus really quickly, whereas he has trouble distinguishing legit email/messages from potentially dangerous ones.

Is the concept of the Digital Native from empirical research or from popular thought?

I think it is somewhere in between. Although there is limited research on the Digital Natives and Immigrants, there is compelling evidence in neurobiology research that show the brain does change with stimulation. As Prensky puts it: “…that stimulation of various kinds actually changes brain structures and affects the way people think, and that these transformations go on throughout life.” (Prensky 2001 Part II). With this in mind, it is plausible that younger generations adapt to new technologies quicker than older ones. I do think this will eventually be proven with more targeted research on the subject.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part II. On the Horizon, 9(6)

Oblinger, D.G. & Oblinger, J.L. (Eds) (2005).

Bullen, M., Morgan, T., Belfer, K., & Qayyum, A. (2009). The Net Generation in Higher Education: Rhetoric and Reality. International Journal of Excellence in E-Learning, 2(1), 1-13

Selwyn, M. (2009). The digital native: Myth and reality.

What have we learned from some 50 years of applying technology to educational problems that can improve our strategies now?

Laurana Alves — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 02:55:56 +0000

What have we learned from some 50 years of applying technology to educational problems that can improve our strategies now?

In my opinion, one of the main lessons learned in the last 50 years is that individual technological advances do not always equate to better education. For example, film, television, radio or even computers seem like they would have revolutionized learning, as they did/do in the broader society, however, they have yet to. This misconception came about because to a certain extent, these mediums mimic the learning environment and experience. For example, at first thought one may think a video lesson may be able to replace an instructor in front of a class because some of the elements of instruction are there. What we fail to realize is the teacher/instructor learner relationship has been evolving for thousands of years, where as new technologies may possess the basic functions needed for learning, lack the intrinsic value needed. Technology needs to be molded to the fit the learner rather than the learner molding to fit the technology. There are great technologies that have yet to be tweaked to fit the needs of the modern day learner. Once they do, they can really revolutionize education.

Reiser, (2001), A History of Instructional Design and Technology, Part I

Reiser, (2001), A History of Instructional Design and Technology, Part II

What have we learned from some 50 years of applying technology to educational problems that can improve our strategies now?

Reiser, (2001), A History of Instructional Design and Technology, Part I

Reiser, (2001), A History of Instructional Design and Technology, Part II

Hello All!

Laurana Alves — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:06:58 +0000

Hello All!

I am a masters student in education technology at BSU. I enjoy music, art, history, and traveling. I do not have a formal background in teaching. I’ve worked in corporate training environments and adult ESL.

“Outfitting 21st Century Classrooms with 21st Century Teachers”

Laurana Alves — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:14:15 +0000

“Outfitting 21st Century Classrooms with 21st Century Teachers” http://www.isteconnects.org/2010/05/25/outfitting-21st-century-classrooms-with-21st-century-teachers/

I found the article “Outfitting 21st Century Classrooms with 21st Century Teachers” interesting because it seemed to put the responsibility of technology on the teacher, which I do not agree with. Since I do not come from a classroom background, my opinion may be naïve. However, I do think the so-called “21-Century Teacher” has no look. I think the teacher will just fit in to the classroom as the traditional teacher once did with a blackboard desk, paper, pencil, books etc. The 20th Century teacher molded to the environment and tools of their time. The main obstacle is organizing the classroom so technology works for the students in a cohesive and fluid way, just like the traditional class once did. The main problem with today’s class is that the technology is disjointed, overlapping, unorganized, and not standardized. So naturally, teachers will have problems balancing traditional proven tools with new technology. If the new wave of technology(s) is to be properly integrated in the classroom, it all must be standardized. There needs to be an overhaul of some sort.