Digital Equity - Spring 2007
Digital EquityPlease respond to the three articles we read on digital equity. In your work setting, do you see evidence of a divide according to race, gender, or socioeconomic status? What are some ways you can address this issue?
Please click on the "comment" link below to submit your thoughts.
posted by Elizabeth Langran @ 3/25/2007 08:37:00 AM
21 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
I’m spending this year working in a middle school in Fairfield. There are computer labs on every floor, and almost all subjects utilize the labs in some way. I’ve spent quite a bit of time with students in the computer lab, so, I could really relate to the information in the digital equity articles. The middle school I’m at offers a computer elective. I’ve actually been the substitute in this class more than a dozen times over the last six months. Interestingly, the computer class is composed of 90% male students, with only the occasional female student in attendance. On several occasions the female students have actual told me that they didn’t sign up for the class, but were placed in the computer elective because it was the only thing that fit with their academic schedule. The article, “Closing the Gender Gap” by Diane McGrath really reminded me of this issue. Just as the article mentions, I have seen a difference in the interest level between male and female students in all classes that involve computer work. It seems that it 6th and 7th grade classes there is a fairly equal amount of interest in technology, specifically programs like Illustrator and Photoshop, but once the kids get to 8th grade there is a sharp drop in 8th grade girls who are interested in the subject. The 8th grade girls don’t seem to be at all interested in continuing to fine tune the technology-based skills they were fascinated by just a short year before. I have no idea what causes this drop in interest, whether it’s because their “friends aren’t doing it”, perhaps their interests change, or as the number of electives grows, technology is just not their first choice. On the other hand, the boys’ interest seems to increase as they reach 8th grade. Many of the male students are into video and computer games. They seem anxious to learn how to make their own animations, and excited at the prospect of designing their own websites. I can’t help but wonder if there continued interest in technology stems from the fact that they spend much of their time out of school on the computer, and exploring various forms of technology.
The article, “Law, Software Fuel New ‘Digital Divide’ by Alec MacGillis really troubled me. I am certainly a supporter of having computers in the classroom and I would like to see more schools in lower socioeconomic areas receive these types of resources, but I do not feel that computers or technology of any sort can replace the teacher. I think resources first and foremost should be allotted towards adequate numbers of certified staff that are truly invested in helping these students to succeed. There is no replacement for a caring, creative teacher. Technology should support the lessons teachers are presenting to the class, and take these lessons to the “next level”. Integrating computers into lessons and projects will help improve the quality and the scope of the lesson. I think it’s important that teachers continue work as closely with students when they’re on the computers, as they do when they are in a typical classroom setting. The computer cannot be a substitute for the student/teacher relationship.
I thought the conference presentation; “Striving for Digital Equity” was really interesting. I enjoyed finding out more about the wide variety of ways that technology is being used in the classroom. The question of quality over quantity is an interesting one, and relates back to the issues discussed in the MacGillis article. It is vital to ask “how is the technology being used in the classroom enhancing the learning environment?” I thought the following was very striking: “When students encounter technology and are encouraged to use them in authentic ways that connect back to their own experiences and create connections with their community, they can be empowered to make responsible choices about how they can use technologies in ways that connect with their own values and those of their community.” Any lesson, including those dealing with technology, which can relate back to what is occurring in the lives of students, is more effective and certainly has a greater impact in the long run.
I agree with the McGrath article in that girls are not attracted to technology through gaming as boys are. I think most kids are first exposed to computers and technology through computer/video games. Most of these games are clearly targeted for boys and girls would have little interest in them. My boys love the PC game Age of Empires that is a strategy/battle/civilization dominance kind of game. My 14-year-old niece found it boring and was totally uninterested. She had more fun surfing the Internet and “chatting” with her friends. More effort should be spent in “how” technology is used in the classroom to address the needs of the students as well as achieving (and enhancing) the curriculum goals. This idea ties into the MacGillis article where students in lower performing schools are given technology. Money is being spent on the technology alone and not training the teachers on how to best use the technology to enrich the curriculum. It is an opportunity wasted when students are given technology the same as they are given a textbook and told to go read it. Or worse, given technology to drill test preparation programs. That is definitely a step in the wrong direction to closing the achievement gap in my opinion, especially when other schools that aren’t in such desperate need are putting technology to more enriching uses. The Warren & Tillberg article addresses the need to make the use of technology relevant to the students that are using it. This approach has more meaning and relevance to students (regardless of schools’ socio-economic make-up or performance background) than the software sold by companies that are using a one-size-fits-most approach under the umbrella of No Child Left Behind. This approach is the best to closing the “digital-divide” and addresses the issue that not everyone is the same and trying to achieve the same identical goals.
Building on Sania’s comment, my son and his friends also play Age of Empires, which I agree seems to be dominated by boys. When he was in 4th grade last year, however, girls and boys alike played Runescape, which is also a violent, historically oriented strategy game. Maturationally, has something happened in the last year? McGrath referenced the AAUW Report and the “machine focus of boys” in “Closing the Gender Gap.” But wouldn’t blackberries and cell phone also qualify as “machines”? I’m in awe of my teenage stepdaughters’ rapid-fire IMing skills, which to my mind qualifies as “tinkering.”
I had the opportunity to witness the gender divide this past week when I chaperoned my son’s 5th grade Links fieldtrip to Devil’s Den. Based loosely on a CSI format, teams of students moved sequentially through 8 stations designed to alert the children to animal behaviors and clues. Each station had laminated placemat-size study sheets providing research, along with a taped off area in the forest with actual clues in place. It was remarkable how the groups of boys – mind you, this was a Links program with children from varied economic and racial groups – inevitably went right to the nature scene while the girls gravitated to the paper-based research. Over and over again, despite my prodding, the groups remained separate and their approaches to the investigation consistent. While computers aren’t involved in this example, it would seem obvious that gender has implications in the broader learning framework. Both genders were engaged and appeared to produce correct and enthusiastic answers to the main leader’s questions; this may speak more directly to UDL, which enabled the different groups to connect with the subject in the way they felt most comfortable.
In “Striving for Digital Equity,” the authentic uses of technology described in community programs clearly offer meaningful learning opportunities. The chance to explore culturally and personally relevant issues can not only inspire and empower, but also at the same time build all-important communication and organizational skills. But the “instructional checkpoints” that McGrath mentions in discussing FITness weren’t mentioned at all in the community programs. MacGillis speaks to the importance of actual teachers, but in the discussion about Community Technology Centers, neither of the programs highlight the teacher/leader involvement. Powerful and creative as technology is, there is an equally important role for a teacher to leverage the learnings these projects make possible.
In my day-to-day work, I see very clearly a different kind of divide: it falls between consulting staff and “support” staff (marketing, finance, HR). All of us are well educated with outstanding qualifications – across gender and race. The chairman of the company is a woman! There is a definite premium on effective communications – those who present themselves and information well do well. I won’t be able to impress that enough on my students. But if you’re not a consultant at my company, you are perceived as second class. So does this speak to our shortcomings as human beings to need to feel superior, in charge, better, no matter what the context? Will we always look for a line to delineate and therefore divide? Equal access is paramount, but I’m not sure if equity is possible.
I found the "closing the gender gap" article very interesting. I never really thought about gender gap that exists within the technology community, however this article made me really think about how it's true. I think that at the younger grades it is not as much of an issue. I see all the classes in my elementary school using the computer lab for almost every subject and both boys and girls seem equally interested in the work. However I imagine this divide grows, as the article mentioned as time goes by and in High School more of a divide probably exists. I liked this article because it really examined why this divide exists. As i was reading it made alot of sense to me. Girls are more interested in learning when it is not compartmentalized, rather connected to something with a "bigger picture" If we can connect technology to the bigger picture in a more real way it would probably be more likely to reach girls. On the brighter side it seems like as time whizzes by ever so fast, technolgy is whizzing even faster, and so it will probably connect to the larger picture more readily in years to come. However, we must be careful not to let it pass girls by, or for that fact people of lower socioeconomic status as well.
To tie into article by Warren and Tillberg it seems as though many communities that lack technology resources will suffer greatly in the future even more so than they already are. This article presented the fact that technolgy has the ability to really bring information into communities. I found one idea stuck out in this article which was that people of lower socioeconomic status are "heavily involved in mass media saturation" This was interesting because the mass media really helps to perpetuate negative ideas about those who have a lower socioeconomic status which serves a self fulfilling prophecy in a way. If only the resources consumed for mass media could be put towards technology integration it could really have a positive effect on these communities. However, how will we make this happen? How will we get the point across that resources spent on technology rather than "mass media" is the most productive route? Something to think about....
I really enjoyed reading “Striving for Digital Equity” by Warren & Tillberg. Not all schools have access to quality software, internet access and most importantly trained teachers that know how to make the best use of their computer time. I have taught in schools where each technology lesson had to comply with the curriculum standards and connect with classrooms lessons. On the other hand, I have also worked in schools where teachers view computer time as play time for their students . Many times, teachers do not know how to connect lab lessons to content. In my opinion, even if the schools are supplied with the best software available, but teacher training is not available, technology time is useless.
It was interesting to learn about the gender gap that exists in technology. Since I work in an elementary school, I do not see a difference between boys and girls eagerness to use the computer. My female students enjoy going to the computer lab as much as the boys. Both sexes like to research and use the software we have available. I agree with Jodi who said that by 8th grade girls loose interest in computer classes. However, I think girls this age change their attitude towards other things as well because they are going through physical and emotional changes. I think that girls probably become interested in technology again as they become adults.
Alec MacGillis article brings up a good point when it talks about how some schools are concentrating in spending money towards software they believe will improve students’ test scores. My district has spent huge amounts of money into a software called “Blue Ribbon Testing”. The software is badly designed, inaccurate and a complete waste of time. Instead of establishing critical thinking skills, this program makes students frustrated and impatient. The pressures of NCLB has really taken away the real meaning of teaching in all content areas.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I thought that all of the three articles were fascinating because they showed various issues related to digital equity. The gender article was interesting since I have observed differences in attitudes toward technology and science between boys and myself. Although I have met several women who are computer savvy and comfortable with a field of science, I was never one of them. I have always been interested in humanities while for instance my brother became a physics teacher. I was intrigued with the results of recent studies about learning outcomes for girls after using different forms of instruction. After making adjustments to girls’ learning styles and abandoning a traditional ways of teaching math and computer skills, female students performed as well as male students in subjects historically dominated by men. It is refreshing to find out that girls can do as well as boys with “mechanical” knowledge. Perhaps if science had been addressed differently in my school years, I wouldn’t feel so helpless with physics, chemistry, and technology.
The article about the increasing achievement gap when it comes to digital instruction was really upsetting. I have heard a lot about downsides of embracing test scores due to No Child Left Behind before. Even though I don’t have school experience yet, the perspective of struggling to meet high-test results in public schools are discouraging. There are companies that generate an immense amount of profit for creating software that promotes mindless drills. While many business people benefit, children do not receive long-term learning gains. Again, poor kids are cheated because they get to practice routine test exercises instead of being encouraged to be creative with sophisticated educational software. Meanwhile, more money is spent for computers at expense of highly qualified teachers, after-school programs, and tutoring. In spite of the clarification of the positive intentions of the NCLB law, it is obvious that investing in improving test scores will not solve problems existing in our educational system. We need to deal with multiple aspects of technology application in schools by addressing equal technology access, effective use, and high-quality content.
After reading the articles last week I made a point to monitor the attitudes of the students in the classroom where I am an aide. Since I work at a school for students with learning disabilities and am aiding in a small classroom of 3 boys and 2 girls, I was able to focus my attention on the ways the genders interacted with technology and how these students utilized computer programs.
My school has few educational programs including Inspiration, but the first grade class mainly uses a program called StarFall. This application reviews phonics with animated books and exercises dedicated to specific sounds. The students in my class usually enjoy the activity because of its aesthetic appeal and the fact that they get to wear cool headphones, but I do wonder about the value of the program since many of the exercises are drill based. The particular student that I aid for usually spends the time clicking on every possible answer until the screen congratulates her for finding the right choice. Like MacGillis’ examples in her article on the ‘digital divide’ of a baseball game where the student discovered how to find the right answer or the girl placing a comma in a sentence repeatedly, I’m not sure of the educational value that’s being gained. Specifically, the programs do little in the way of instructing students what to do or offering various learning styles since these students have learning disabilities. I agree with the articles that state that there really is no substitute for teacher instruction and group learning. These programs cannot replace actual instruction since they do not cater to student differences. As the SITE Conference Presentation article supports, simply placing technology in front of students does not guarantee results. Rather, it’s what is done with the technology that will improve learning and we need teacher and student interaction to begin. To expand the use of technology in our classroom the teacher and I are planning a project using windows movie maker where the students will retell a fairy tale and draw pictures that we’ll scan in and sync up with their recordings. Instead of just clicking the mouse in rote learning programs, we’ll being using the PBL style that might help to increase learning for these students, no matter ability or gender.
In McGrath’s article on gender and PBL, the author described a difference in boys and girls when it comes to technology as related to interest in video games and programming. As a few other people have commented, I have also found this to be true. When my students get free time on the computers the boys immediately gravitate towards Lego.com or other websites that focus on games that they play or toys that they have at home. The girls, however, either spend the time looking for pictures to print out off of Google Images, or they log onto the Star Fall software that they use during class time because they’re not sure what else to do. I find that the girls need more guidance, suggestion, and reassurance that they can do other things on the computer than just using the educational software. To them it seems like the computer is a boy’s domain and not a place that offers a lot to girls. I try to combat this by bringing them to different web sites or showing them things that they might be interested in. Plus, I find having the boys show off what they’re doing on the computer to the girls helps not only with socialization, but it helps the boys to explain their experiences and the girls to see that they could do the same activities.
In the middle school where I am currently interning, I have seen evidence of the gender divide regarding technology. Right now, the 7th grade students are in the process of choosing their elective classes for next year, something they have never been able to pick before. When talking to the students, I was amazed at the number of boys who told me they were going to be taking computers for three semesters while the majority of girls responded with art classes. Even being in the computer classes, the ratio of boys to girls is heavily sided with boys. I feel that there is a stereotype among the middle schoolers that it is the boys who are good at computers and technology mainly due to their background in video and computer games. In my opinion, this is a very dangerous stereotype especially in our day and age when technology is becoming more and more pertinent. I’m not sure what would make girls feel more compelled to take computers as an elective. The class does helps students learn critical software which they will encounter in high school and college and many girls are missing out on these skills due to their dislike of computers.
In the article “Law, Software fuel new ‘digital divide’”, some schools have begun to focus more on using software in hopes of raising “test scores with the software.” (MacGillis, 1) While I have not directly witnessed this, I have observed the increase in using technology in the classroom. While it is all for pertinent reasons, there is a fear that this could spiral into a more dependent relationship between the teacher and technology. I truly believe that technology, no matter how great it is, can ever replace a teacher. Therefore, I feel that technology can be a great aid in the classroom yet should not become the sole focus. Rather it should be used to aid and complement a lesson instead of being turned to as a constant means of education. This problem is something that unfortunately will most likely only increase due to the growing nature of technology in our society.
The last article on striving for digital equality was very interesting. I feel that digital equality is not just about whether a classroom has access to a computer. Rather it is the quality of technology that is available. Having poor quality computers and older tools does not mean automatic success just because technology is present. I feel that this ties in directly with the digital divide that is occurring in schools especially with the idea that “it is important to consider the type of content being created and how this content will help to enhance the learning experience for the learner.” (Digital Equality, 2) Technology is a fantastic resource yet it shouldn’t become the focus for any schools especially for schools that are not equipped with the latest equipment and resources. Rather it should be used as a means of enhancing the content when necessary.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Since I work in an elementary school I really do not see a difference in the interest that the boys and girls show towards using technology. They both enjoy using the computer when writing, researching, or using the software available to them. I agree with Luzia that as they grow older girls lose interest in using technology because they are maturing both physically and emotionally. They have other things they become interested in. As they grow older and become adults, girls will most likely become interested in learning about technology again.
In the article “Law, Software fuel new ‘digital divide’”, some schools focus more on using software to raise test scores. I have seen the use of technology increasing in the classroom. I feel that the use of technology offers students authentic and meaningful opportunities to learn. I think that technology should only be used to support lessons and not replace the teacher.
I found the article on striving for digital equality very interesting. I feel that digital equality is more about the quality of technology that is available to schools and not if they have enough computers in their classrooms. Technology should not be the main focus for any school particularly for schools that do not have the latest resources and equipment available to them. As I have mentioned before I believe that technology should be used to support and enhance learning.
I found the article “Striving for Digital Equity” to be very interesting. My experience with this issue is small due to the fact that I have only taught at one school in my eight years of teaching. I was lucky enough to be hired by a district with a strong focus on technology and a large budget to assist in this focus. At my school, we have three separate computer labs which are on a flexible schedule and each classroom has four to five computers to assist teachers in integrating technology into their teaching. In addition, each class is allotted a 40 minute class period per week to co-teach and collaborate in technology. Both the classroom teacher and the technology teacher coteach during this time each week. The technology teacher is a frequent member of grade level meetings to collaborate on projects to meet both the Technology curriculum and the grade level curriculum. Where I believe there is always room for growth and improvement, I also believe that our school is meeting the technology needs of our students at this time.
In a course that I took last semester, I met a person who taught at a school with only one computer lab, no computers in classrooms and a large number of students. I believe that this is the epitome of inequity among digital resources. How can children growing up within ten miles of each other have such differences in their education? How can states across the United States provide digital equity to each district in the state? How can students be expected to be educated members of society when they are not given the tools and resources they will need to survive in this society? These are questions that I do not have answers to but am left pondering over after reading these articles.
A heated topic amongst so many Americans is the “No Child Left Behind” act which has schools, teachers and students being tested to meet requirements. In the article “Software Fuel New Digital Divide” by Alec MacGillis, the issue of impoverished schools not having “highly qualified” teachers or sufficient funds to help students achieve to the level needed for this act is discussed. The article spoke about “Skill and Drill” and test preparation software being purchased for schools. Where the positive of this is that more students and schools will be using computers, the negative is that it will not likely have a lasting result in student learning. The technology for these programs does not provide students with creativity or the use of the computer across the curriculum. I believe that there is so much software out there for students and teachers that it must be carefully reviewed to determine the benefits of the use of the software for lasting results. If schools have highly qualified teachers, these teachers will have a much longer lasting effect on students than skill and drill software.
The article “Closing the Gender Gap” raises an issue that has been prevalent in education for many years. The fact that gender can influence a student’s learning and way that they achieve is an interesting argument. However, I believe that so much more than gender needs to be considered when trying to meet the needs of all students in your classroom. When thinking of Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences as well as gender, I begin to feel overwhelmed and wonder how one teacher can truly provide for the twenty-five different learning styles in a classroom. It is a fact that boys have a higher achievement at mathematic and science content where girls tend to have a higher achievement in Language Arts. The article gave me a deeper understanding of how gender can affect this. Girls tend to seek a deeper, conceptual understanding. They also tend to want to discuss their findings with others. Boys want to learn the technical workings of something and do not have a need to discuss these things. I believe that it is important for students to have experience with both ways of teaching and learning because once they enter the world; they will be faced with many different styles within a workplace and need to be flexible. However, as a teacher this article made me evaluate my teaching to see if it meets the needs of both genders. I believe that there is always room for improvement and this is something that I will continue to reflect on in my future when planning for future learning experiences for my students.
I found the Warren and Tillberg article extremely interesting and it really made me think about the technology uses within schools. I have had the opportunity to spend time within high schools in both Fairfield and in Waterbury, two schools on opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of socio-economic status. Looking beyond the difference in access to technology of the schools, I found it very interesting to relate the possible differences to the overall school environment.
Observing within the Waterbury high school, everything is focused on order, discipline, and security. In meetings I had with the principal, she would often be monitoring the hallways and communicating with security guards while we were talking. She was very much in control of everything that was going on throughout the school. I feel like this type of "Big Brother is watching" environment trickled down to the department heads and the teachers and most certainly effected the students' sense of freedom within the school. A school environment that focuses so strongly on control and limiting the students freedom is a difficult place for creativity and innovation to thrive.
In stark contrast to the school in Waterbury, the high school in Fairfield I observed at did not have the same strict, ruled from the above attitude. The students in each class clearly felt a great sense of freedom. The comfort level the students had within the classroom I feel could contribute to the quality of technology use in the school. The students are trusted to work on their own, address topics of their interest, and be as creative as they wish. This type of trust was simply not there in the Waterbury high school, either from the administration or teachers, and that type of creative, culturally relevant technology use could not exist within its strict environment.
There are things that boys do better than girls, also true the other way around. I believe that gender roles are shaped not only in school, but primarily at home. The toys girls play with are dolls; boys get robots, Lego or cars as presents. Thus, boys learn how to construct and deal with mechanisms when they are very young. On the other hand, girls become caregiver figures to the doll or to their little brother or sister, modeling after their mothers. I am not saying this is the standard for all boys and girls, but I do believe this happens in many families. The formation of the gender roles continues in school and at work. As we all know, not many women are engineers and not many men are secretaries. This is the result of what is acceptable for women and men to do in our society.
The article of McGrath did not surprise me because, as many of you mentioned, boys and girls have different interests when using technology. While girls still play with dolls and make-up, boys become more involved with video games. They start using technology way before girls, and by the time they are in school, they are eager to decode the software for the particular subject area. Of course, girls can be consistent and achieve the level of proficiency in technology. It is important that they are encouraged to take a computer course or a few, to develop the skills that they will need in future schooling and career. Nowadays, the girls and boys’ choice is not about what they like, but what they will need in the fast computer demanding world.
All of you agreed on the fact that teachers are still the best source of education, rather than the drilled program in the computer lab. I also agree, and I do not feel behind, comparing myself with the people who had access to computers in early childhood. I was first exposed to computers when I was in High School, and I was taught in the traditional way of learning with: a teacher and a textbook. I learned to use different software when I became a college student. The times changed and today more than ever technology is everywhere, thus, all students should have the equal access to it. It will provide them with possibilities to explore the world and also to find what is of best interest for them. In all means, the teacher will be and should be the central and most important figure in the students’ learning.
I work at a middle school in Branford where the ratio of students to computer is 3:1. I don't really see much of a divide between boys and girls when it comes to computer usage. I don’t see a divide between any students for that matter. I think because I work with seventh graders, and they have had this sort of exposure in the school since fifth grade, they equally enjoy the usage. Also, there are programs implemented in the school that provide valuable understanding of technology.
When I was reading the article "Law, Software Fuel New, 'Digital Divide' " by Alec MacGillis, I felt almost guilty. It is so terrible that these students are granted the opportunity to have a facility equipped with new computers, in an otherwise lacking school. Instead of being a positive experience, it is a sour one because there are not enough highly qualified teachers in the school, and these poor students are given boring test prep programs to work on.
Every student in Branford has to take computers in fifth and sixth grade. This course teaches you the basics of navigating around computer programs and email. When they come to seventh grade, they are introduced to what they articles dub, "high order thinking skills," in regard to technology. They learn about advertising and media's effects on us, and how that is incorporated into Internet usage. They learn how to make a spreadsheet, blog, podcast, manipulate photos, and create a webpage using Dreamweaver.
In seventh grade they are pass/fail in the course and they work with two teachers until four weeks into the program when they become independent and have to work on their final (webpage) project with supervision. They must communicate with their teachers through email. In my class of nine special education students, five of them chose to do their final project for me in a power point, and emailed that power point to me as an attachment when we had trouble with the big computer in school! I actually receive emails from students regarding work, not just their parents.
Every student in the school is required to pass a state assessment in the eighth grade (a booklet of every task they should know how to do in regards to technology before going on to high school) which follows them to the computer program in high school. They take technology seriously because it’s not something that is going to disappear from their lives; it is something they will build upon every day in their education. My power point example is from a special education class. I have walked into the ESL classroom on many occasions to see the students typing away on the computers in there. There is even a computer in the In School Suspension Room if the students' assignment requires it.
I would say that the school I work in luckily fulfills the definition of "striving for digital equity," as stated in the article "SITE Conference Presentation: Striving for Digital Equity," by Kenneth Warren and Heather Tillberg. They claim, "When students encounter technology and are encouraged to use them in authentic ways that connect back to their own experiences and create connections with their community, they can be empowered to make responsible choices about how they can use technologies in ways that connect with their own values and those of their community." This whole article explains basically what we discuss or apply in our MD 400 course, and that is creating your own learning. This is a very possible outcome, if all students are given the right tools to do so in technology education.
What I learned from the article Closing the Gender Gap: Girls, Technological Fluency, and PBL," by Diane McGrath is that students need deep understanding of technology in order to keep up with all the changes. It is the responsibility of the teacher to make sure the student gains independence, does group work, and even teaches other students what they learn. I feel as though this article is valuable to teachers of students in elementary grades because it explains how girls will learn and succeed when it comes to technology. I think at a young age, girls might believe that computers are more for boys because of the games. However, I watch two little girls and have a little sister and the three of them are so into that Webkins game on the computer. I think that times have changed so much that the majority of children, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status have computers in their home and know how to, at least basically, navigate them.
I love Age of Empires and have played many versions of it over the years...unfortunately, I can cite further examples of what has already been posted. I have been the lone female in the computer class of males. I've been the only female on committees or in a several meetings about technology at work. This is especially surprising because my field, publishing, is very female dominated. In many cases, though, a female perspective is welcomed by the men because many of our products are used by female librarians and female students.
One thing that keeps some women out of the technology field, I think, is not just fear of making mistakes or being the only female. As life and careers go on, females don't want to be answering emails or taking phone calls in the middle of the night, as some IT professionals do. Very few women want to, or feel it's safe to, take the overnight server watching shift. It's a lifestyle choice. Also, because its an exciting field with lots of new and changing things every day, in general, to maintain a firm graps of knowledge, you have to be dedicated to keeping up on that. As a mom, student and full time employee, I simply don't have the time my male colleagues have to read cnet or whatever on a daily basis. I have enough time to do my own work never mind read every spare minute.
I must say that I have absolutely no experience with the "gender gap" McGrath talks about. I teach at an all male high school. My experience as a real estate agent however has led me to agree with some of the comments Cathy West (kzw) made regarding females using other technologies. In my work as a realtor I have noticed that many of my female counterparts are utilizing the technologies offered by blackberry and Palm. In fact, the majority of realtors whom I know to use the palm software to entirely organize their listings and buyers are women. I don't think that the "Age of Empires" is such strong evidence to the "gender gap" simply because, traditionally, those types of games have been played by males when talking about school aged players. Thinking back to games like "Risk" and the like, I can't recall hearing the girls talk about their nights playing those games like us males did.
Like Jodi B, I teach in a school that is well, if not over, equipped with technology. This kind of limits my ability to comment on the MacGuilles article as well. I will say however, that Jodi B hit an important point. It is a point that is echoed by the closing comments in the "PowerPoint is Evil" article, that technology is not the answer to our problems in classrooms. It is extremely disturbing that we might be willing to accept technology as an end rather than a means to achieving a desired end.
I agree with most everybody when it comes to the question of the importance of having computers in the classrooms at underprivaleged schools. I definately think that the teacher is the most important aspect of a classroom and don't feel as though the students with little to know computer training are behind the proverbial eight ball. I do however, feel that we ought to make an effort to put computers into as many classrooms as possible, of not for anything else, for the psychological value it may have on those underprivaleged students. The feeling that you don't have what others do will always give you a psychological disadvantage. A psychological disadvantage is, to me, the worst type out there.
The first article that I read was “Closing the Gender Gap”. Reading this article reminded me of the inquiry based learning that we discussed earlier this semester. This article refers to it as Project Based Learning. Even though I teach at an all boys’ high school, I was able to identify with the findings of this study. I remember when I was in school that I learned much better in an environment that was more structured. Like the girls mentioned in the article, I would not explore programs on the computer unless it was part of the project’s requirements. I agree with the article that girls need more encouragement than boys when it comes to utilizing and understanding technology. Using this theory hopefully more girls will be turned on to subjects like math, science, and technology.
The article that interested me the most was the one on software and its effect on the “digital divide”. I was engaged in this article from the moment I started reading it. Since I teach in New York City but in a private school, I feel that my school fits into both the urban and suburban models this article examines. We currently use software to reinforce topics being taught in the classroom, as well as for preparation for the SAT’s. However, we do not use the software to the same extent as the one school mentioned in the article. I was amazed by the comments made by the teacher proctoring the lab at the less advantaged school. She saw the computer time for the kids as a break for her. I also was amazed that anyone would think that the children were actually learning the skills provided by the software. The portion of the article that mentioned the student who clicked the help option on the screen made it clear to me that all the students were learning from the software was how to beat the software. They were not learning the roots of the words. I believe that the appropriate use of software is in conjunction with teacher centered instruction. Some schools seem to want this software to be a replacement for teachers.
After reading all of these articles on equity it is clear to me that what schools need equally are good teachers. What I noticed from the last article I mentioned is that it doesn’t matter whether you have lower level teachers or lower level software the results are the same; low. And conversely, if you have higher lever teachers or higher level software you will have higher level results.
As a result of my experiences as both a 6th and 7th grade regular education English teacher as well as my current position as a 7th grade special education teacher, I have witnessed a range of technology use and availability. Whereas my present school system in Ridgefield does not lack funding or support, the children I work with always have access to computers and software. In addition to the availability of computers, many teachers in my school understand the importance of linking technology to lessons and projects.
While not all teachers are qualified or comfortable in providing instruction via computers or interactive programs, it is important to recognize the superior availability of computers and trained staff in districts where funding is available. Prior to working in Ridgefield, I was an English teacher in New Milford, Connecticut. Although our school had two computer labs, the difference in technology and computer access and availability between the two school districts is very apparent. While teachers worked very hard to utilize technology and provide students with integrated instruction, students are not receiving as much access there as those in districts with predominantly higher socioeconomic status.
I found the three articles to be interesting in that they touched on the latest issues regarding the development of technology integration and use. Although I have witnessed issues of “Digital Equality,” and the “Digital Divide,” I have never actually taken the time to think about the lasting impacts of these differences. I have also never realized the fact that schools in lower socioeconomic areas have begun spending money to use computers to increase test scores, without increasing the percentage of qualified teachers they have working with their students.
In addition to reflecting on my own experiences with the “Digital Equity” and the “Digital Divide,” the article about “Closing the Gender Gap” motivated me to think about the interaction of both girls and boys with technology. Although I had never really thought about it, the difference between female and male interest in computer games, programs, and usage is significantly different. It is interesting to consider these differences and think about how they may influence the future of learning and education.
I found the three articles amazing!I have always noticed the differnce in interest between girls and boys in technology, but I guess I have never thought about it!
As Martha mentioned, I was also happy but not too surprised with the results of recent studies about learning outcomes for girls. After making adjustments to girls’ learning styles and abandoning a traditional ways of teaching math and computer skills, female students performed as well as male students in subjects historically dominated by men.
It is amazing to know that there are companies that generate an immense amount of profit for creating software that promotes mindless drills. I strongly agree that while many business people benefit, a lot of children don't. It is obvious that poor kids are in great disadventage when it comes to bennefiting from educational technology! As the article on "Striving for Digital Eguity" was great! Not all schools have access to quality software, internet access and most importantly trained teachers that know how to make the best use of their computer time. At my school, we do have a great computer llab, but at the other school that I used to work, there was no computer lab at all! We would only have a very old computer in each room! The only grades who had access to technology would be 4 and 5 grades. I know that times are changing and schools are spending more money in improving technology to aid education!
Post a Comment
<< Home