WebLog 2

Based on your reading of the Zhao, et. al. article linked below, please compose five (5) thoughtful and significant queries, questions ideas, etc. that you would really want to study and discuss tonight in class.  Defend the queries that you composed.

1. It was interesting to examine the requirements associated with the grant applications. Notably, the grants appear to have been awarded based on credentials other than research supporting how the specific technology will increase or enhance academic success. It seems as if many of the educators who applied for the technology grants were more concerned with introducing innovative technologies rather than focusing on the probability of academic success as a result of the new technology.

2. The section describing the innovator’s social awareness was also interesting. The authors argue that socially savvy teachers know the social dynamics of the school, and are aware of where to go for what type of support, and are attentive to their peers. Teachers who do not are inevitably more likely to be less successful with new technology implementations. This seems to be a poor reason for not being successful with new technology initiatives. The innovator must be responsible for utilizing available resources, especially after being awarded a grant to help improve academic performance. A lack of success as a result social ineptitude seems to be a somewhat limited excuse.

3. The article did well to stress the importance of Technological Infrastructure. An educator must be knowledgeable about their school’s capacity to support technology. Additionally, it should be the goal of the school to make this information accessible to innovators who are willing to introduce new technology to improve academic learning. Page 24.

4. Another noteworthy section of the article involved the role of social and staff support regarding the implementation of new technology. The article suggested newly thriving technology programs are often dependent upon how well respected a member of the staff is with his or her colleagues. This point is worth discussing. The staff should support new technologies initiatives because of the possible benefits connected to academic success, rather than based on perceived respect levels of the innovating staff member. Example, Henry’s case, page 26.

5. Lastly, the article stresses the importance of group collaboration and the notion of linking pedagogical beliefs with technology initiatives. According to the article, it would be wise and potentially more successful to introduce new technology programs with multiple staff members who share similar beliefs regarding curricular goals (curricular goals which can be achieved as a result of appropriate supportive technology). Although the article mentions that most new technology programs are usually successful when innovators have familiarity with the technology; these new programs could become even more significant if like minded educators who share pedagogical beliefs also share the responsibilities associated with integrating new curricular technology goals.