|Read a Post for Teachers, Not Technicians: Rethinking Technical Expectations for Teachers|
|Reply to this Post|
Technology in EdLand
|Posted By: Dick Schutz on November 22, 2005|
|Wikipedia, the free Internet dictionary defines Technology as:|
“Depending on context, technology is:
· the tools and machines that help to solve problems;
· the techniques (knowledge) that includes methods, materials, tools, and processes for solving a problem (such as building technology or medical technology);
· a culture-forming activity (such as manufacturing technology, infrastructure technology, or space-travel technology). (McGinn)
· the application of resources to solve a problem (such as knowledge, skills, processes, techniques, tools and raw materials).
· an encompasing term to describe the level of achievement in science, mathematics and engineering of a group or culture.
· in economics, technology is the current state of our knowledge of how to combine resources to produce desired products (and our knowledge of what can be produced).”
The definition concludes:
“Thus, usefulness is the essential feature of technology.”
EdLand has come to operate independent of this definition. In EdLand technology is synonomous with equipment, typically “computers” that ed personnel are obligated to “use.” If the equipment=technology is not used, or is found to be useless or non-beneficial, the fault is held to be with the ed personnel. The usage is an extension of the belief system that texts and other “resources” are simply “there.” It’s the teacher’s responsibility to make them useful.
The orientation renders EdLand technologically barren. Teachers and school districts are ill-suited to perform the R&D that produces “the techniques for solving problems.” It’s unreasonable to expect individual teachers or districts to do the job by tinkering with equipment. The technology cart and horse should be carrying teachers, not burdening their backs.