ETEC 695

Terry S. Toney

A major paradigmatic shift must occur if technology is to become a leading tool in a classroom teacher's arsenal against illiteracy. Teachers must be encouraged to accept and wholeheartedly exploit the inherently different and unique abilities that classroom technology offers, rather than simply view a computer monitor as a surrogate textbook. Existing paradigms must be crushed and teachers must be empowered to utilize technology in new and exciting ways. Critical to the successful incorporation of technology into American classrooms is unflagging support, in the form of teacher training, beginning at the pre-service level, but continuing uninterrupted throughout the teacher's career.

Traditional educational paradigms are one reason why classrooms teachers as well as administrators do not recognize or feel comfortable utilizing the inherently different and unique facets technology offers students today. Thomas Kuhn explained in his book, the Structure of Scientific Revolutions, that a scientific community cannot practice its trade without some set of conceived beliefs. The advent of these "conceived" beliefs became the structure for what Kuhn defined as a "paradigm". These paradigms provided crucial infrastructure to help train other scientists in the way this particular paradigm worked. This idea of a paradigm can logically be extended to encompass more than just scientific communities. In truth, most of society's rules have a basis formed around some type of paradigm. Paradigms can be thought of as formal "comfort zones", and when viewed in this light, it is easy to see why people tend to avoid having to break a paradigm that has been useful and comforting to them in the past.

There is probably nothing in American society today that is so firmly entrenched and enduring as the "educational paradigm". The educational paradigm, that of sitting quietly in one's desk, book open, pen in hand, is so firmly entrenched in the minds of school children, parents, administrators and the general public that it is virtually unshakable. The influence to an educational paradigm is begun in early childhood, whereas other paradigms tend to make their presence known in early adulthood, when formal training or study of a field normally begins. Dr. Jane Healy, in Failure To Connect, states it simply, but eloquently on the first page of her book, "The younger the mind, the more malleable it is."

Indeed, the educational paradigm is perhaps the most universal and enduring paradigm in society today. Mandated school attendance ensures that each and every American child born in the recent past is exposed and raised in this traditional educational paradigm. This "paradigmatic comfort zone" tends to be a deep, abiding and intensely difficult zone to break out of for the majority of elementary and secondary classroom teachers. The pre-service teacher education student enters their first methodology course with a much clearer (albeit narrow) mental picture of what "teaching" entails, as opposed to a junior physics student, intent on beginning a formal study of astro-psychics. This is due to the early and perhaps overwhelming exposure to formal education in the U.S.A. today. Even when faced with the mandated task of incorporating technology into an already overloaded lesson plan, teachers try to force technology to become surrogate textbooks and glorified typewriters. This is nothing but a desperate attempt to try to fit this new threat into the comforting bonds and boundaries of an old, outdated comfort zone.

It is little wonder, then, that teachers tend to view technology in the classroom as just another way to write the same old, "What I Did This Summer" essay. It is little wonder that the Internet is viewed as nothing more than a glorified encyclopedia, where mouse clicks replace fingers turning pages in a book. The educational paradigm is a strict and unyielding one, which allows many, if not most, to ignore the inherently different and unique facets that technology has to offer the classroom.

Kuhn suggests that when an existing paradigm breaks down, a "revolution"occurs. Revolutions happen when there is a sufficiently large number of followers who feel comfortable enough to switch from the accepted paradigm to the new paradigm. As difficult as it is to break out of a paradigm, particularly one as firmly entrenched in the minds and souls of people as the traditional classroom methodology paradigm of lectures, notes and quizzes on Fridays, it has been proven that paradigm shifts do occur, and therein lies the hope for technology in the classroom.

Paradigms are not the only concern of educational technologists, however. There is a naive idea floating about that espouses that by simply exposing students to information, via the Internet or some other technology source, somehow magically Little Johnny will suddenly learn to read. Neil Postman, the proverbial doomsayer, in Technopoly, under the interesting title of Chapter Four, The Improbable World, goes so far as to state "The world has never before been confronted with information glut and has hardly had to time reflect upon the consequences." School administrators demand extra minutes of computer time each week, stuffing yet another mandate into an already overloaded curriculum, in the vain hope that exposure to information will somehow seep with the click of a mouse button into eager, but unprepared little minds. Simply put, downloading is not thinking, yet it is perceived as such by many.

Given this naivete, one would expect this simplistic view of educational technology and its effect on learning outcomes would come from either simpletons or rural route hillbillies. Perhaps, in some people's views, it does indeed come from simpletons, since in actuality, it comes from the federal government. The federal government's commitment to "wire" all schools in the nation by the year 2000 suggests that simply dropping wires helter-skelter will dramatically improve learning outcomes, in a way not seen since Sputnik took the American public by surprise all those years ago! When the federal government has such naive dreams and unrealistic ideas, it is not difficult to see why even the best and brightest tend to fail miserably when it comes to trying to utilize technology in new and exciting ways.

In Seymour Papert's book, Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas, Papert espoused the use of LOGO, a self developed programming language to teach using the constructivist approach. This learner-centered educational method is a controversial one, given it is diametrically opposed to other more traditional educational methodology. LOGO itself has experienced its share of controversy. Research does not typically support the use of LOGO to improve learner outcomes, at best the research is inconclusive, at worst, it is vaguely negative. However, the use of LOGO, in its purest constructivist form, would probably not be well received by administrators when perusing the weekly lesson plans of the teachers and so LOGO was probably somewhat doomed from the start.

Children today are members of the Nintendo generation and as such, are much more intuitive in exploring the uniqueness of technology. Teachers recognize that most children have more computer knowledge at the age of nine than they may ever possess. It is little wonder that facing a classroom of nine year old budding little Bill Gateses would be intimidating for a teacher with little time, less experience and virtually nonexistent training in the use of correct, age appropriate computer usage.

In the second chapter of Jane Healy's book, it is stated that in 1997 only 15 percent of teachers had received at least nine hours of educational technology training, yet school boards today continue to mandate computer usage in the classroom. Still, even with several hours of basic technology training, without a change of great magnitude in teacher attitudes, classroom management styles and curriculum, classroom technology is going to find it difficult to find a comfortable and happy place to rest in the average classroom. Leading educational paradigms must undergo radical revolutions, leaving room to embrace the new, the dreaded, the unfamiliar "constructivist" approach to education, whereby project-based, problem solving approaches to learning can be explored and accepted. Healy notes in the last chapter of her book that this as a major factor in placing technology into a classroom and having it be used effectively and efficiently. She then goes on to mention that technology implementation has been force "grafted" onto old, outdated educational paradigms where the fit is awkward, unwieldy and uncoordinated, to say the least.

It is unfortunate that local school boards and administrators still feel that their job is done when the computer is unpacked from it's cardboard box and the network line is dangling limply in the corner of an overcrowded classroom. To truly support and encourage the use of classroom technology state, national and local school boards must provide adequate teacher training of a type that explores and embraces the inherently different and unique abilities of classroom technology as well as encourage the use of constructivism as an acceptable approach to learning.

References Healy, J.M. (1998). Failure to connect. New York, New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc. Kuhn, T.S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago. Papert, Seymour (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. New York, New York. Touchstone Publishing. Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly. New York, New York: First Vintage Publishing.