If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to this blog via e-mail or my RSS feed .  I also am on Twitter .  Thanks for visiting! 

Gary Stager says:

There are three competing visions of educational computing.  Each bestows agency on an actor in the educational enterprise.  We can use classroom computers to benefit the system, the teacher, or the student.  Data collection, drill-and-practice test-prep, computerized assessment, or monitoring Common Core compliance are examples of the computer benefitting the system. “ Interactive” white boards, presenting information or managing whole-class simulations are examples of computing for the teacher.  In this scenario, the teacher is the actor, the classroom a theatre, the students the audience and the computer is a prop. 

The third vision is a progressive one.  The personal computer is used to amplify human potential.  It is an intellectual laboratory and vehicle for self-expression that allows each child to not only learn what we’ve always taught, perhaps with greater efficacy, efficiency or comprehension.  The computer makes it possible for students to learn and do in ways unimaginable just a few years ago.  This vision of computing democratizes educational opportunity and supports what Papert and Turkle call epistemological pluralism.  The learner is at the center of the educational experience and learns in their own way. 

Too many educators make the mistake of assuming a false equivalence between “technology” and its use.  Technology is not neutral.  It is always designed to influence behavior.  Sure, you might point to an anecdote in which a clever teacher figures out a way to use a white board in a learner-centered fashion or a teacher finds the diagnostic data collected by the management system useful.  These are the exception to the rule. 

While flexible high-quality hardware is critical, educational computing is about software because software determines what you can do and what you do determines what you can learn.  In my opinion the lowest ROI comes from granting agency to the system and the most from empowering each learner.  You might think of the a continuum that runs from drill/testing at the bottom; through information access, productivity, simulation and modeling; with the computer as a computational material for knowledge construction representing not only the greatest ROI, but the most potential benefit for the learner. 

Piaget reminds us,“To understand is to invent,” while our mutual colleague Seymour Papert said, “If you can use technology to make things, you can make more interesting things and you can learn a lot more by making them.” 

…. 

kindergarteners could build, program and choreograph their own robot ballerinas by utilizing mathematical concepts and engineering principles never before accessible to young children.  Kids express themselves through filmmaking, animation, music composition and collaborations with peers or experts across the globe.  5th graders write computer programs to represent fractions in a variety of ways while understanding not only fractions, but also a host of other mathematics and computer science concepts used in service of that understanding.  An incarcerated 17 year-old dropout saddled with a host of learning disabilities is able to use computer programming and robotics to create “gopher-cam,” an intelligent vehicle for exploring beneath the earth, or launch his own probe into space for aerial reconnaissance.  Little boys and girls can now make and program wearable computers with circuitry sewn with conductive thread while 10th grade English students can bring Lady Macbeth to life by composing a symphony.  Soon, you be able to email and print a bicycle.  Computing as a verb is the game-changer. 

Used well, the computer extends the breadth, depth and complexity of potential projects.  This in turn affords kids with the opportunity to, in the words of David Perkins, “play the whole game.”  Thanks to the computer, children today have the opportunity to be mathematicians, novelists, engineers, composers, geneticists, composers, filmmakers, etc… But, only if our vision of computing is sufficiently imaginative.