The Sunday New York Times included a front page article discussing the impact of technology in the classroom. Their issue of the moment for this nearly two- page-long article is simple: They contend that studies are inconclusive, but there is no documentation that heavy technology expenditures improve student learning.
“Technology in Schools Faces Questions of Value”, New York Times, September 4, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/technology/technology-in-schools-faces-questions-on-value.html?_r=2&ref=education
Well, let’s back up a moment. Everyone in the article appears to say that technology allows students to be more engaged, and that it delivers information in a more interactive and informative matter.
What studies do NOT show is that there is any improvement in students’ test scores is schools with more tech-enabled classes, compared to schools that are not heavy into technology-assisted learning.
It is a fascinating article. I’d enjoy hearing your viewpoints on this – simply because as the story points out, many schools spend as much on technology as they do text books. Is that technology expense justified?
Do you feel the article is fairly presenting the issue? Is the question that the article proposes the correct one to ask? Do you feel that test scores are the correct method to use to measure the success or failure of technology in the classroom?
I have my thoughts, and will share them later this week – though anyone who knows me, or has taken a class with me will be able to guess my inclination on this.
Meanwhile, here is the link to the article in question!
“Technology in Schools Faces Questions of Value”, New York Times, September 4, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/technology/technology-in-schools-faces-questions-on-value.html?_r=2&ref=education
