Now then. That being said, let's assume that our society fully embraces technology as a CRITICAL component to a 21st Century education (and this is the conclusion that they should, most definitely, support and sustain). Now what? Accessing technology doesn't happen by itself. We have to invest in technology both financially AND intellectually. I appreciate Sara Bernard's article, "Crossing the Digital Divide: Bridges and Barriers to Digital Inclusion" in which she discusses the three types of digital equality "challenges": the digital divide, dealing with accessibility of hardware and software, the access divide, understanding the ease of accessibility in the event of breakdowns in computer hardware or sustainability of ongoing usage, and finally the connected divide, ensuring literacy and the ability to connect and share information back and forth. The first two types require a significant financial commitment to first support the purchase of substantial amounts of hardware and then the technical personnel to support these investments. The third component, the connected divide, requires an intellectual investment in training teachers to integrate technology in ways to achieve higher level thinking skills and authenticity of learning in the classroom. There are shortcomings in all three arenas.
Let me illustrate. In my school, there are 3-4 computers in every classroom, including the teacher's laptop. We have three computer labs housing about 25-26 working computers in each lab, and we have laptop carts for each grade level, each housing 24 laptops (of which on any given day 3-4 are not working). There is a 3-consecutive-day maximum that a teacher may use either the laptop carts or the computer labs. With approximately 56 content-specific teachers in the school (excluding co-teachers) you can see where there would be conflicts. The fact is, our school doesn't have enough computer hardware for every teacher to support the "cutting-edge" technology that is available on the Read/Write Web. Simply stated, we need to acquire more accessibility to computers. And with a heavier investment in computer hardware, our district will need to invest in more technical support. You see why I started this article the way I did? Yes. That means we have to put our money where our mouth is and fight for funding. Fight for education. Fight to put people in high places who value education. Without this kind of support, we are doomed to mediocrity and half measures, all of which will avail us nothing.
As for the third component, the intellectual investment, that is something that we can certainly work on NOW. We do not have to wait for every student to have an iPad to ensure that teachers understand how to integrate technology in meaningful ways in the classroom. We do not have to wait for the district to allow cell phones in classrooms (although that would be cool) for teacher training to begin in earnest about the amazing accoutrements of the Read/Write web and how to use them effectively in the classroom. We don't have to wait to begin to shift and update the educational paradigm to embrace technology for the power it brings to the classroom simply through teacher training. We can start NOW. But we do face the paradoxical question: "What comes first, the chicken or the egg? I like Bernard's point that "The question is not whether we can get an iPod into every kid's hand. It's whether communities can leverage the capacity of networks to make learning more authentic and powerful for students." True. Agreed. Notice how she said "communities?" That includes parents, businesses, city governments, tax payers in general, as well as teachers in schools. We all have to embrace the potential that technology holds, and commit to taking the bull by the horns and jumping in with both feet. If we wait for the full body of research to come out about the effectiveness of technology on higher levels of thinking and learning, our students and future leaders of tomorrow will be left behind in every sense of the word.
The time to act is now. At the school level, teachers must be trained not only in the bells and whistles of technology, but how to integrate meaningful technology to increase student achievement by encouraging higher level, critical thinking skills. As Bernard posits, "It's not just word processing, but blogging and tweeting; not just a class project, but an international student collaboration; not reinventing the wheel every time, but tapping into a professional-learning community that shares ideas and resources." Communities need to support the effort as well, by educating the public about what schools need, and by encouraging SPLOST monies to be invested in updating technology in local libraries and other public arenas. Businesses could invest in education by providing incentives for technology grants and even providing financial gifts to local schools. Parents could get involved by ensuring that technology is accessible at home. It's an investment in their children's lives and futures.
Our society has the money. We've placed two wars costing a trillion dollars on our national credit card while politicians have the audacity to call teachers "greedy." We invest billions of tax payer dollars on weapons systems which, in the best case scenario, we will never have to use. We're willing to dump millions of dollars in political attack ads on television. We pour millions of dollars into building new sports arenas. We spend millions of dollars taking our kids to the movies and equipping them with designer clothes and televisions in every bedroom. Seemingly, we pay for the things we value. Why not education?