Reflecting on Postman, Reigeluth & Joseph

Week 1 Reflection
As a preschool teacher, technology plays a very different role in my classroom, compared to upper elementary or secondary education. We look for ways to enhance learning experiences through technology. The uses of technology in a preschool classroom require teachers to facilitate the learning. A large majority of students enter preschool without knowledge of computers or other learning technology. As I read through the two articles, I found myself referring to my own classroom and relating the examples to things that could or do happen with my students.

After reading the article by Postman, I felt quite offended. To think that there are people out there who believe technology could replace the social experiences and emotional learning that a young child learns when provided those opportunities by a teacher is appalling. While, yes, they may learn social/emotional lessons at home or in their community, it is important to have those experiences in a classroom environment. Technology will never teach a four year old to stand up for his rights or teach a three year old to share their toys. Postman’s idea that “the principal function of school is to teach children how to behave in groups” is exactly on target. I don’t believe this is the only goal of education, but a very big one, especially in early childhood. However, he goes on to say “school has never been about individualized learning” and that is a point, I believe, is incorrect. As preschool teachers we are constantly adapting and changing lesson plans to create more individualized lessons and technology can be great in assisting those opportunities. For example, a preschooler who struggles with hand control or other fine motor skills could largely benefit from an iPad application that requires touching, dragging, and clicking on various objects.

In Reigeluth and Joseph’s article I felt that technology was almost glorified as being the answer to every problem in education (except the budgets of course!). I thought table 2, Principles for a Learning-focused Paradigm of Education was interesting. I can see where some of the things presented are likely to become a reality, if they are not already. For example, peer-assisted learning is already very prominent in many classrooms, as teachers look for ways to incorporate different learning styles of students. However, the idea of authenticity is pushed beyond reasonable limits. It is important for students to get an authentic, close to life as possible experience, but who’s to say what is relevant to a student’s life? Especially to a young student. What may seem relevant today, may be completely irrelevant to their education in ten years.

In summary, I felt like both articles had valid points, but pushed too extreme circumstances for technology in education. While Reigeluth and Joseph’s article was far too supportive of technology, Postman’s article minimized the possibilities and potential for technology as a supplement to learning.