Technology Integration - Part 2

Our Changing Curriculum

The story so far...

We are in the Information Age. This means more and more information is being created, traveling faster and faster, through more and more channels. Schools and the rest of society are trying to cope with this new reality.

What are the Forces Shaping Washington State Curriculum?

One of the reasons technology integration is difficult is because both technology and curriculum are changing simultaneously. We are all familiar with how fast technology changes. How many versions of the Apple iPod are available now? How many new models were released last year? At the same time that new technologies are being introduced on a daily basis, the curriculum in our K-12 schools is undergoing changes as well. To integrate a rapidly changing technology into a changing curriculum can seem like an impossible task at times.

K-12 school curricula are under pressure to change due to three distinct forces: the Information Age, efforts at “school reform” by the educational establishment , and political efforts to improve schools such as No Child Left Behind. We have seen that one of the effects of the Information Age is to force us (students, citizens, everyone) to use higher order thinking skills. Let’s look at how school reform efforts are affecting curricula.

Below is a table summarizing some of the efforts to reform education in the last 15 years. If you have been teaching for a while, undoubtedly you have seen some of these efforts. Or you have been a part of these efforts.

To integrate technology into curriculum, one must understand both technology and curriculum.

The Information Age is driving changes in technology; technology is driving the Information Age.

The Information Age, school reform, and political efforts are driving curriculum change.

As curriculum changes, so does classroom practice.

As classroom practice changes, so does the manner in which technology may be used in the classroom.

The connection between technology and curriculum is information and information skills.

When the information in a unit of instruction is identified, opportunities for technology use are identified as well.

U.S. Department of Education (1993)

It is clear that if some of these changes in the table above are put in place, then the use of technology in a classroom will be affected. For instance, what if the teaching style in the classroom goes from “teacher directed” (traditional) to “student exploration (reform)?” This will probably result in fewer opportunities to use technology as compared to when a teacher is lecturing and talking all day long. If students are exploring, there are many more opportunities to use technology. Every one of the approaches in the table above has implications for technology use in the classroom.

In the future, there will likely be new initiatives, new versions of efforts at reform. What implications will they have for technology use in the future? In order to integrate technology into curriculum, it is imperative that the curriculum be fully understood, not just the nature of curriculum today, but what the curriculum of today is in the process of becoming. As curriculum changes and as assessment of the curriculum changes, our teaching methods must change. As our teaching methods change, and the resulting classroom practice, the potential for the use of technology changes as well.

School reform also includes the efforts by national organizations to develop national learning standards for students. The NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics), NCTE (National Council for the Teaching of English), and AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) are three examples of national organizations that have developed standards. Most states have adopted the national standards to some extent, and use them to guide state curricula. These standards also have implications for how technology might be used in the classroom.

The WASL (Washington Assessment of Student Learning) is both a school reform component and a political initiative. The WASL grew out of the standards movement and was an attempt to improve education in Washington State. The WASL is a criterion referenced (compare student performance to a standard) test as opposed to a norm referenced (comparing students against the student performance averages) test. In addition, the WASL is a performance-based assessment (this is a “reform” initiative in the table above) as opposed to a knowledge-based assessment.

The classroom methods and practices we would put in place to prepare students for a knowledge-based test will probably be different than those we would put in place to prepare students for a performance-based assessment. Practicing for a performance is not the same as mastering rote knowledge and the preparation for each should look different.

Our curriculum is also being shaped by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) initiative. This is part of the ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act). Each state (to receive federal education money) must put in place a testing regimen to assure that all students are succeeding. Washington State chose to use the WASL for this purpose. The NCLB defines the parameters for success and failure and consequences for failure. Since Washington State uses the WASL to satisfy the NCLB demand for assessment, this makes the WASL a “high-stakes” test.

As a high-stakes test, teachers must “teach to the test”. So, we have the NCLB requiring a high-stakes test (the WASL) which, in turn, requires specific classroom practices. Do these classroom practices allow, encourage, or restrict the use of technology?

There is a convergence of forces in schools right now. A summary of these forces shows:

• The Information Age is forcing us to use higher order thinking skills.
• School reform efforts all encourage higher order thinking skills.
• The WASL (mandated by NCLB) requires students to use higher order thinking skills.

The question we will address in Part 3: how does the use of technology fit with higher order thinking skills?