Jeff is tired of the word ‘integrate’ and I don’t blame him. It’s all I’ve been focusing on for the past month and it’s starting to ‘grate’ on my nerves too. (Oh that’s bad.)
I agree with Jeff that the word is so overused, it seems to have lost a proper meaning. However, when Jeff defines it as “To integrate something means to find a place where it fits, to start with two separate pieces and see how you can fit them together,” I prefer a definition from dictionary.com which states that the verb to integrate is ‘to combine’ or ‘to make whole’. As you can see, my idea of to integrate isn’t ’to add’. I see positive in the ‘make whole’ idea.
I read several ‘anti-tech in schools’ points of view
– a great exercise I recommend to everyone. I realize now that they are not against technology, but rather that the higher level thinking skills are not going to be developed if technology is pushed thoughtlessly into the classroom. For example they worry that technology will dumb down education by making students either use search engines to find ready answers without going through the process themselves, or get distracted by all the entertainment value and get to develop the skills everyone agrees they need to be successful: reading, writing, math as well as being able to analyse, evaluate, and understand.What did this teach me about good tech integration? Well, that it is a thoughtful, well planned out use of technology to support the development of these skills and enhance the learning of content in the various curriculum areas. This kind of integration requires the classroom teacher to make the decisions: what type of tech, when, how, etc… The teacher is the key to making it work.
Photo by Cea
Third, you would integrate technology before school starts, in the planning stages, during curriculum and unit development. This is my ideal, but of course hard to achieve without support from administrators and a culture of collaboration between teachers and technology facilitators/specialists/coordinators/coaches. It is difficult because the technology standards must be interwoven into the content area standards. It is ideal, because it is the most efficient: several goals can be met through one unit. For example, classroom teachers want students to be collaborators, and NETS for students include the ability to use technology to communicate and collaborate. Have you ever seen someone working a loom? Have you seen the patience and planning that goes into creating a tight, sturdy, but beautiful incorporation of threads and design? Take a look at the video below and think of the patience, planning and care that must go into the creating of these textile works of art. Now imagine teachers and educational technologist putting that much effort into interweaving their goals & standards into beautiful, but practical units.
“Effective tech integration must happen across the curriculum in ways that research shows deepen and enhance the learning process. In particular, it must support four key components of learning: active engagement, participation in groups, frequent interaction and feedback, and connection to real-world experts. Effective technology integration is achieved when the use of technology is routine and transparent and when technology supports curricular goals.”
Love the loom example! There is so much that goes into a really thoughtfully planned unit and the reality is that we don’t often do all that’s required. I’m going to use this idea the next time I talk about tech integration here at YIS, I really like the visual of distinct pieces coming together to form a more beautiful whole. Thanks!
No bigger compliment than having you use one of my ideas. I’m sure I’m not the first to see tech integration as weaving. In fact, this week, trying to catch up on the reading of my CoETaIL EARCOS cohort, I saw Linc use the word ‘woven’ in his tech integration post.
I totally can see the phases as described by you going here at AES.We are on the doorstep of the third phase of “Integration” by the teachers, with the help of facilitators. I liked the way you explained the three ways as progressive as it practically can get.
I liked he weaving analogy . I think that is the crux. And it won’t be possible without planning the unit way before the execution. Very well said. I enjoyed your post very much.