Real-World Examples of Successful Classroom Technology Adoption

I promised in my post from a few days back that I would offer some real-world examples of successful classroom technology adoption reflecting the "three requirements I spelled out in that post. Just as a reminder, the three Classrom Technology Integration (CTI) requirements for insuring widespread adoption are:

1. Must be user-friendly, intuitive, and cost-effective
2. Must mimic some existing technology in the classroom
3. Must add some new value over previous technology

I know the first requirement is a bit of a "duh!", but I think we all see too many examples where technology gets way too complicated and thus is left around to collect dust. These are our early 21st century paperweights.

So, let me now offer two examples, and the possible next step from our current state.  

EXAMPLE 1:

Example 1 is the move from school slate and chalk, to pencil and paper, to a possible move one day to some form of tablet device:

Yes, this a very simplistic example; however, it also perfectly demonstrates the three requirements. The move away from the slate came because pencil and paper was a very easy transition to make and is cost effective. The pencil/paper option was a perfect mimic of the slate option, but added tremendous value in that you did not have to erase your work but could instead just turn the page. Thus students could retain all their lessons from the day for study later.

Will we see a move to tablets in the future? Some schools, colleges, and companies have already begun to experiment with this option. 

Advantages include the ability to take notes, load classwork and homework, and submit all of it for review, automatic scoring by the system, saving teachers a great deal of time, the ability to track subject-related strengths and weaknesses so as to better target solutions, and many other possibilities. Weaknesses include cost, higher level of complexity, and the need for regular onsite tech support.

EXAMPLE 2: 

Example 2 is somewhat similar to the previous example in that it's the move from classroom blackboards, which were the norm even when I was in college, to the whiteboard, to a possible future of some kind of Smartboard:

The move from blackboard to whiteboard is a no-brainer, even though that move is relatively recent from a long-term historical viewpoint.  Whiteboards are cheaper, cleaner, easier to maintain (unless you decide you want to use regular markers on the board rather than dry erase markers), and easier to view from any point in the classroom.  In addition, it's easier to use various marker colors in creating lists or illustrating concepts.  Yes, there was colored chalk, but how often did teachers / professors use colored chalk?  From my memory, almost never.

The move from blackboard to whitebard clearly follows all three CTI requirements, though the move to a classroom "Smarboard" system may not.  Having used Smartboards in the past, they do offer some distinct advantages, such as the ability to display the board to both in-room and remote participants, the ability to view and play many types of media, and the ability to create lists and diagrams just as one would with a whiteboard, only with the ability to save the work and send it out to participants.  In addition, teachers could load curricula to their boards, including interactive assignments and reuse content over and over again without having to take time to write anything themselves. if a curriculum program is updated, the content is automatically updated for the Smartboard as well, thus saving teachers a great deal of administration time.

Weaknesses include the cost (many thousands of dollars per unit) as well as the complexity of learning how to effectively utilize the system.  Time saved writing assignments on a board would be lost to pulling up files or other various tasks.  Also needed are improvements to the overall usability of the Smartboard systems.

That said, we're now seeing the appearance of Smart Television systems which will ultimately become much cheaper and may become the solution of choice for classrooms.  Private businesses are already starting to integrate Smart TV systems for their use.  Colleges and universities will follow (if they haven't already, and K-12 systems will then likely adopt the systems as well.  

In addition, the use of Smart TV systems give numerous companies the opportunity to develop "learning apps" to use with the boards, which will greatly lower the cost of each system while expanding usability and effectiveness.  

It goes without saying that eventually, if tablets and Smartboards do become the next generation of classroom technology, they'll need to be integrated in some manner.  This too becomes an opportunity for companies and one can already see some forethought on the part of Google with their recently launched Google Classroom system.  

So, what are your thoughts?  Are the CTI principles flawed in any way you can see?  Are there better examples?  I look forward to your comments.

Three Best Practices for Integrating Technology Into the Classroom, Pt 1

Four years ago, a colleague of mine and I gave a presentation at the Learning 2010 conference. Our topic came from a couple theories I developed regarding how Elearning affects classroom learning and the ways each mode has begun to change and shape the other.  Over the next two or three posts, I'm going to outline my theories and discuss the coming of what I believe to be a "New Blended" learning model.  First, let me outline my first theory, which I think other learning professionals will largely agree with.

THEORY 1 - Elearning has improved Instructor-Led Training (ILT)
In the early 2000's, many thought Elearning would be the death of the classroom.  Instead, Elearning has actually strengthened it.  It has done this in a few different ways:

• Elearning as pre-work - One of the banes of instructors in the classroom is having to deal with students with widely varying levels of knowledge or skill.  Instructors have the difficult job of juggling those skill levels to prevent those with less knowledge from being left behind while not boring those with more knowledge.  Elearning pre-work and pretesting flattens the classroom landscape by pushing those with more knowledge forward to more advanced training and bringing those with less knowledge up-to-speed with the rest of the classroom. This is a huge advantage for instructors who can then more easily engage all students without leaving anyone behind while at the same time, meeting the stated goals and objectives of the training.
• Elearning as post-work - Online and/or Elearning post-work strengthens what was learned in the classroom; adding to overall retention and reducing the risk of new skills being lost.  Scheduling post-work at various intervals means the significant investment a company makes in instructor-led training will return value.
• The NEW "Blended" training model - Most of the time when we mention "blended learning" today, we mean a blending of Elearning, Virtual Instructor-Led, and Instructor Led Training.  We blend these distinct "modes" of learning into a whole program or curriculum. So we send out Elearning pre-work to participants, then move them through the classroom training, then reinforce everything with post-work of one type or another  Increasingly, however, "blended" will, I believe, refer to the process of adding Elearning components directly into an Instructor Led Training session.  So, for example, at some companies, longer and more intensive training programs have traditional instructor components blended with learning simulations accessed through computers or, increasingly, tablets.  These are not paper-based simulations or role plays, these are complex simulations which allow companies to take the content just learned and place it into context for the learner.  What this means is that, for the first two hours of a course, we might see participants learning how to interact with a client using a company system in the traditional way; a student guide, PowerPoint slides, and perhaps even a live demo. The next two hours would then be practicing those skills in a simulated environment where they can interview clients, enter data, process orders or deliveries, etc.  In that environment, not only is it safe to fail, instructors are able to track the progress of learners through the simulation and assist only when necessary. Tracking and reporting can also help designers track problem areas in the simulation.  There's much more which can be mentioned in relation to the "new blended" approach, but this is a start.

This is probably enough to think on for now.  When you're ready, Part 2 can be found here!