Swapped a few emails with the Wolfram folks this week around a really cool simulation I was trying to show (struck out ~ still not sure why). They, of course, were pushing to get us to try their stuff. I know it's super-powerful, but when is change too fast? My teachers do a good job with graphing calculators and have learned and are incorporating GeoGebra a across many courses. Wolfram offers more power, but it's also more demanding/technical software.
NEASC, PowerSchool, new year (with many of us teaching new courses), Common Core, InterWrite Boards.
My sense is that adding a new instructional software would be an overload.
I'm all for taking time to sharpen the axe while cutting down trees, but I think we reach a point where adding new & potentially improved axes can retard the tree cutting (and we don't have a luxury of time in this business). So when do we retool? How long do we stick with a good tool even when new tools might be better. We're in an age where new tools are coming all the time. I'm no luddite, but it sure feels hard to stay "cutting edge".
Seems poignant in the context of our PowerSchool transition.
There certainly is only so much time for teachers to implement that is why it is increasingly important to decide where to put the emphasis, or from a leadership perspective "attenuation." I believe education is in transition - we need to be able to sketch out an end game for teachers, identifying those values that will be carried forward while they adopt new approaches/tools that can better secure those values.
ReplyDeleteI've never been a fan of pushing tools or 'keeping up with the Jones',' so to speak on tech fronts. Using these tools though for their creative capacity rather than simply information devices to read, research, write (and print) is a higher goal.
ReplyDeleteMy take on the overload... I keep thinking the Wolfram software and related projects... spending more time on identifying a problem, figuring out how to tinker on it, rather than doing such heavy hand based computation, and then applying the solution would be a welcome addition to traditional computation heavy math classes. Learning to program along the way... is a good thing. It also doesn't have to be a dept thing, nor should it. We have flexibility to create a 'computer based math class' of sorts along these lines. There are a lot of models out there to learn from... best and worst practices from folks who have done this already. An 'Applied Math' class (to take a shot at a title)... 'Use cutting edge computational tools to solve real-world problems' sort of thing. Guessing it'd be popular... and very fun, challenging, and innovative to teach too.
My guess... a class that uses the Mathematica software (which would require a teacher to be trained to use it)... the work there would cascade into other classes.
Hey... I'll help you design it ; )
The focus is the student ~ with a clear mindset on where they need to be, the task is (1) knowing where they are and then (2) crafting a series of experiences to move them (closer to that defined target). The tech should be one tool to facilitate -- to motivate, automate, deepen understanding/shift focus.
ReplyDeleteSo far so good?
So how do we stretch to incorporate tools that we're not aware of?
Or more broadly, when should we?
Fundamentally, isn't that the question here?
In the case of the Wolfram resource, does it make sense to acquire a new tool and begin to develop that resource (which is more what this becomes).
In the more specific, we're good with using handheld calculators to accommodate harder data and allow the focus to shift to the thinking rather than crunching. And we do a good job using GeoGebra as a tool to provide something dynamic that makes the mathematical concepts more meaningful. Both resources are broadly used, but neither resource is used to it's full potential.
I advocate for broadening thinking on curriculum/experiences. If that creates a more organic need for new tools, fantastic. But I don't want a focus on technology to be at the expense of focusing on students.
Mike, I hear what you're saying - there are tons of tools out their for foreign languages as well. I have learned many, and use a few that I really like but which also have their flaws. There is always something new, but as you say, there is a balance between new and old. If there is truly a better way to do something, that truly helps the STUDENT understand something better, than go learn it. The problem is that sorting out things that are being promoted as the new best thing because someone wants to make money off of it and something that is truly new is hard. I have found that the professional listservs (like AP FRENCH) I am on that have recommendations from other teachers who are also in the trenches are the best way to get practical recommendations. Do you belong to any for math? I would post the question in those forums to see what others who use the same tools think.
ReplyDeleteMichelle