Chapter 2 & 4

In chapter two, the successful integration of technology into the curriculum is discussed by LeBaron. Two important topics that were discussed are a need for an effective plan for technology as well as participation in the plan by everyone (LeBaron, 2001). LeBaron argues that we need to each take ownership in the use of technology in the curriculum for it to be successful. Goals and guidelines must also be in place to maximize effectiveness of technology integration (LeBaron, 2001). Two topics discussed by LeBaron, where I feel we sometimes fall short, are the appropriate integration of technology for each curriculum and that we need to assess its effectiveness properly (2001). In my opinion, this where school leaders need to “step up”, and not worry about the benefits of the technology first and not the budget, another point argued within this chapter. Is this realistic? I don’t know, I agree that the plan needs to be created without regard to budgetary issues, but I wonder how much it happens. Is there a school division out there where the budget is not a driving force; where budget meetings are not the most attended meetings; where money is not being fought for by many different departments? I understand that the integration plan and budget are connected, but I wonder how many of the tweaks LeBaron talks about are necessary become out and out changes due to funding or the lack there of?

In chapter four, Jarvela appropriately entitles the chapter "Getting the story out" (Jarvela, 2001, p. 43). Successes, in the schools, need to be shared with others in our school, in our school division, and in our community. Parents and politicians need to know how we are teaching and effectively using technology in our classrooms. These groups need proof that technology motivates and helps students enhance their learning (Jarvela, 2001), because they hold the proverbial purse strings for funding. If we enhance and document our uses of technology, our teaching for understanding and our authentic assessments we will be able to give parents and politicians the necessary documentation they need (Jarvela, 2001). This sounds like it is simply adding another task to the already overflowing plates of today’s teachers, however it is a necessary evil to get the desired funding, and more importantly-keep the funding. Chapter four reminds me of the saying, “The squeaky wheel gets the grease.” To me, this is what Jarvela is abdicating. If we want to gain more tools for our classrooms, we need proof, proof that we are effectively using the technology and how do we give them proof? Through our documentation and of course……through higher test scores on standardized tests. While the test scores seem to be what speaks the loudest to officials, it is the documentation that will benefit other teachers. So while it may be a pain to do, in the long run it could be beneficial to the ENTIRE WORLD OF EDUCATION!!!!!!! (or at least to yourself as you prepare for the same lessons in following school years!)

References

Jarvela, S. (2001). Technology and learning: Getting the story out. In Lebaron, J.F. & Collier, C.Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

LeBaron, J.F. (2001). Curriculum planning for technology rich instruction. In Lebaron, J.F. & Collier, C. Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.