| |
Response and Reflection
Cuban, Larry.
(1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of
technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.
This text provides a historical outline of the past century of teachers
and technology that have been developed to improve the delivery of
instruction. The textbook, published in 1986, covers film,
radio, television, and computers as well as the teachers role in
integrating these technologies in the classroom. Cuban provides
many relevant studies in describing the evolution of these media.
Rather than attempt to just summarize the book, I am going to try
to talk about some of the things that I thought were interesting.
My favorite part of the text is his epilogue and the clever
commentary, such as describing the relationship between teachers and
technology as a "fickle romance". He provides a cohesive and
detail-oriented account of the events in the past century, while
outlining problems, misconceptions, and his conclusions.
Out of the three first delivery mediums: film, radio, and instructional
television, I believe instructional television seems to be more
realistic than radio in a classroom environment, and obviously better
quality than film. I find it difficult to believe that students
can effectively and efficiently learn by listening to a radio
broadcast. This does not mean that I do not believe radio does
not have value for education, however. I am an avid listener of
National Public Radio talk shows like Talk of the Nation or the Diane
Rehm's show can maintain my interest and are great learning
opportunities. However, learning math or accounting, which were
subjects mentioned by Cuban, I find to be difficult using only an
auditory medium. Of course, that is just me. I do remember
learning songs to remember my times tables in elementary school,
though. Perhaps that is the type of instruction since elementary
schools were shown to use the technologies more than high schools.
I also found it interesting that many of the major educational programs
mentioned by Cuban using these media would organize their entire school
day around the media. That just seems silly to me. I think
that was the point he was trying to make... but I had to read between
the lines. I think the big issue was whether the medium was
within the locus of control of the teacher. Instruction that is
not based on broadcast obviously lends the teacher more control over
when and why the the students are going to experience the medium.
I suspect it would also engender more buy-in from the teacher
since nobody likes being told how to do their job all the time.
Cuban does note that teachers were often not included in the
planning process and that they were the gatekeepers to the classroom.
What's most disturbing usage statistics provided in the studies
and the ways in which they were derived. Cuban points out an
ample list of methodological problems associated with these numbers.
Starting in the third chapter, Cuban begins to move form a primarily
historical perspective to a more realist approach. One particular
statement caught my eye: "Reformers intent upon altering teacher
practices ... will have one or more of these explanations as the
attempt to sell teachers on the virtues of the next machine that
supposedly will revolutionize classroom instruction" (p. 52). He
then continues to outline the common problems teachers face in the
implementation of technology in the classroom: accessibility of
hardware and software and poor integration. He notes the many
problems related to the hardware infrastructures (reliability and
inflexibility) and the narrow minded (my word choice) outlook of
the primary innovators (research faculty, etc). Teachers do not
forget these bad experiences and that knowledge is retained between
generations. It is no wonder why there is resistance to change.
Moving from one system to the next requires buy-in. When
people are sold false promises, the loose that buy-in and loose
interest.
Speaking of buy-in, I buy-into Cuban's quasi-theory and discussion
"situationally constrained choice". We most definitely are
influenced by our previous experiences with teachers, and it is
unlikely that teachers can identify more important problems than
non-teachers. Further we do face a task of management. We,
as teachers, have to manage our students, curriculum, organizational
goals, and integrate these things into our everyday practice.
These factors influence our practice and help explain our, as
Cuban would say, "fickle romance" with technology. And there are
those that Cuban calls the willing users: me. While his
explanation is antiquated and focused on the concern for visual
literacy and the routine day at a school, there are still willing
users. Being that I teach technology, I am obviously not afraid
to use technology in the classroom or out of the classroom in my
distance learning courses (not an option anymore). I am also
young and naive :-)
I went out of my prescribed reading order. I read David Noble's
article prior to reading the fourth chapter of Cuban's book. In
doing so, I have found that many of the perspectives of others (ie.
Papert) and Noble still exist. The arguments are the same old
song a computer can replace a teacher... a teacher cannot be
replaced by a computer. What a boring argument. I don't
agree or disagree with either, but I also don't see these events
as mutually exclusive... this situation needs to be considered in
context. Cuban described that computers were sold the same way
its predecessors were to teachers. People still fell for it, but
according to Cuban, teachers and administrators are the primary users.
Of course, LOGO is mentioned and the estimated number of hours a
student used to spend per week.
While Cuban does address important considerations of the times, we have
passed these points in time. It is no longer a choice of whether
computers should be taught and used in the classroom. It is an
expectation. Many of the problems still exist (hardware and
software), but the average student coming into the classroom these days
is often better equipped to use computers. We offer all the
distance learning courses, virtual schools, and degree programs, and we
use computers to facilitate the process. We also have better
technology that is often much easier to use for the laymen.
Further, at this day in age, we do not have a choice as teachers
anymore. Computers must be included or our future will not be
prepared to enter the information economy. |