Thoughtful Question #2:You have completed Wenglinsky, and you have read the two executive summaries that suggest serious failures in a major national reading program and in the best math and reading software. In three-to-five paragraphs, use what you learned from Wenglinsky to interpret the findings of the two reports. Suggest one or more plausible reasons for the poor results presented in the reports.
After reading both of these studies, I was not at all surprised to find no significant results in either study. After all, aren't we used to seeing this result in studies measuring the impact of technology on the educational process? Now, after reading Wenglinsky, I feel I have a better understanding of why that happens. That is if you buy into his theory. Personally, I find his ideas intriguing and may help those of us in the field better understand technology's role.
I had difficulty applying Wenglinsky to the Reading First Impact study. After reading the executive summary, I learned the various components of instruction that were focused on but very little about any technology used to assist in the instruction of these components. After reading the King Middle School study, my feeling is that the technology was probably in there somewhere, but not the main focal point. I was pleased to see professional development was included, but there was little detail on the development program. From what I was able to get out of the summary, the program did not appear to be constructivist based at all. Taking all of these items into account, I would say according to Wenglinsky, the impact of the program suffered from the pedagogy.
In the second study, Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products, I was pleased to see some technology products with familiar names. The first thing that came to mind as I read the software titles was that most of the titles were drill and kill. This immediately raised some flags for me when applying Wenglinsky. The programs are not much more than a place to put the students. As I look back to my own school district's use of some of these programs, only one is still in use.
It is no wonder we find the results that were reported. If we believe in Wenglinsky's ideas, we will keep seeing this same result until the field comes together on two things. First, when it comes to technology, the constructivist approach has a better chance of success. Second, we must focus on the training of our teachers to ensure they have the tools and knowledge needed to succeed. The latter is something that in my experience, is often overlooked.
4 comments:
I also find Wenglinksy's ideas about constructivsm very intersting. He certainly makes a convincing case!
I think Wenglinsky would absolutey agree with your evaluation of these programs.
On a side note, as a technology person in a school district do you happen to know if there any good computer programs available that follow the constructivist model?
I think you hit the point right on the head. It was difficult to comprehend why these programs were not reaching expectations. But like you said, after reading Wenglinsky, he spells it out. I think if we were to focus on his reasonings, within a couple years, a national education system could be introduced that has curriculum based on a constructivist platform!
Michelle,
One of my favorites it the West Point Bridge Designer program. It is a free program developed by the Army Corps of Engineers. Each year, there is a national contest using where students build a bridge to certain specifications within a certain budget. Here is a link to the program:
http://bridgecontest.usma.edu/
Michael, it is interesting you mentioned the "drill and kill" software. I think this is the way much of the technology in mathematics is used as. Not the most effective way of teaching with technology. When technology is used a means to enhance the classroom work rather than the tool to teach the material, learning becomes more evident. The former juxtaposed with a highly motivated, well trained teacher can transform the classroom environment more at ease and therefore the learning will prevail.
I like that you also talked about professional development. It is such an essential part of improving teaching and consequently learning.
Post a Comment