Week 1

I have spent a couple of days thinking about the two articles. Reigeluth really spoke to me because of the changes the staff at the school I work at is working towards in regard to technology. Over the past three years, our staff has worked hard to take our technology curriculum to the next level. Reigeluth's article really made me think about the direction teaching could take. I love thinking about technology as "transforming" teaching. The reality of technology in the classroom needs to be realize as the information highway continues to change. The question for me is how do we help professionals see the teaching potential that lies in technology. As technology becomes a part of our world, we have to figure out how to educate and train teachers to use the technology that works for the curriculum they are expected to teach. We want to show them how curriculum can drive how we use technology. Reigeluth recognizes that this is not an easy task. I believe that schools systems are recognizing that the new educational need is to prepare all learners to be problem solvers, to take initiative, to work in teams, etc. Postman on the other hand, defines the purpose of a school to "teach children how to behave in groups". Perhaps this is one aspect of education, but I question if it is the purpose. In response to the statement "School has never been about individualized learning", I would disagree. Educators work hard to meet each child at their level. If educators see teaching as a learning focused paradigm, technology could aide the teacher in maximizing each child's potential. In the teaching world, we call this differentiated instruction. It can be difficult to achieve, however it is necessary to help each student learn and grow. I find technology as an integral part of teaching. If we choose to use technology to teach children, we will help them move forward, if we do not, they will quickly become among those individuals who are unemployed.