Isn’t it shiny?

When I used to be a teacher I was bombarded with potential resources. The internet is filled with blogs and best practices that I would have to sort through. There were times when my school would want to me to use this novel approach incorporating all sorts of gadgetry into my instruction…sadly most of the time it didn’t work…sometimes it was just for the sake of using the resources mounted in the buildings.

When I was teaching abroad in India all my classrooms had smart boards, a projector and computer tower, what they didn’t have was electricity and internet fast enough to load a 2-minute video. It was someone’s genius idea to give teachers great resources but not have a sustainable plan, even day-to-day. Moreover, none of the teachers were trained on how to use the smart boards…so they reverted back to a traditional lecture style where teachers talked at students, kids took notes, and the technology collected dust. I think if someone in the administration had taken the time to ask a handful of teachers, really only one or two, if a smart board was a useful tool for their classroom…well then, the outcome might have been different. Instead of trying to wire up the campus with an internet too slow to load instructional materials, maybe the better outcome would have been distributing dvds with engaging material. All that needed to be done, was ask a teacher what they thought. But somewhere in all the racket about cool, new toys, the teacher voice was lost.

Often times in educational research and evaluations there are judgments and prescriptions thrown about. There seems to be a need to say “you have a problem, and we have your solution…here it is shiny, no.” Instead of the solution coming from an idea from within the classroom, it is often thrust upon instructors. “Here is your solution it is an iPad, they are amazing tools, you can do so much, and they are shiny.” Except school-wide iPad implementation has works in some places and failed in several more. So where does that leave us?

This isn’t so much a commentary on the tool but rather on how this entire process was implemented; it depended heavily on how convinced teachers and administrators were in the value of the tool, and the support given to the instructors to make the most out of it. Well did they really buy into the selling pitch?

If you don’t have a teacher voice and a teacher buy-in the program isn’t going to go too far, in fact your program might not even get off the ground. So before an evaluation prescribes and a researcher describes, there is a need to take a step back and look at the teacher perspectives. There is a need to create this kind of foundation.

So before there is commentary on how technology needs to be implemented and best practices of leveraging technology tools for instruction (in whatever scenario is being looked at), there needs to be a place for a teacher perspective.

My research goal is to look at teacher perspective and how that has shaped the implementation of technology in classrooms, and even the actualization of processes needed to use the technology. I want to take a look at not only what teachers think, but also how their approach impacts what they are actually doing in the classroom with the tools given to them. I want to take back before the prescriptions are handed out, to ask teachers” is it really going to work…is that what they need…is that what they want…and is that what they are going to use?” It seems simple enough, right? But somewhere in all of this meta analysis, literature and international interventions these questions get lost.

Let me give you an example. Last year I did an analysis of every single demographic question that was asked, ever asked, on international large scale assessments like the PIRLS, PISA and TIMSS. I wanted to take a look at what kinds of questions were actually asked of the teachers, and how many of them looked at the teacher’s perspective. I found that the teachers’ voices were faint, and even while the data collection questions were not asked of what teachers valued, but of what they did and resources housed in their classroom. While this was a historical analysis of documents, I discovered that the types of questions asked of teachers hadn’t changed too much in the past 25 years.

Sometimes, speaking from my experiences, what a teacher does in their classroom may not align with what they believe. It may have more to do with the resources available to them, and the direction and culture of the school. I think there is a need to ask what is it that a teacher values, really values: to better understand how successful a technology can be in a classroom; to better understand how a particular technological tool can enhance the learning experiences; and to better understand how certain tools are leveraged in the instruction process.

The bigger picture: is taking the idea of teacher voice and going global; looking nations that require additional assistance in revamping and enhancing their educational process; and moving from a bottom-up approach in educational technology policies. The regions of interest are often called conflict states, facing issues of violence, war and even natural disasters and then attempting to rebuild their society. Those places may not need an iPad, or one-to-one computer programs…perhaps what they need are instructional materials on dvds or a way to have instant feedback over radio lessons. When teachers are more concerned with keeping children in school rooms for their own safety…well that is when the prescriptions have to get creative and the teacher voices are most important.

Students spending a little time reading