Sunday, May 15, 2011

Chapter 2: TPACK, TIP and the DIGITAL DIVIDE


Chapter 2 is a good refresher for me, after having the infamous objectivists and constructivists of education drilled into my memory in college.  Although Roblyer and Doering (2010) clearly analyze the learning theories and instructional approaches, I could have just as easily chosen any one of my college textbooks to review education fundamentals.  On the other hand, I was more interested in learning more about the TPACK and TIP models.  Without realizing it, I have applied both of these technology complexes from the very beginning of my pre service teaching experiences.  I am confident in utilizing many forms of technology such as the SMART board, and Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator, although I halt to a screeching halt in the 5th phase of the TIP model.  I have lesson plan ideas oozing from my ears, yet the unavailability of resources and the outdated classroom conditions inhibit any opportunities to advance to the final evaluation phase of the TIP model.  For example, I was required to attend 3 different workshops within the past two years regarding technology use in the classroom…primarily SMART board training.  Unfortunately, two of the few classrooms still without a SMART board are the two studio art classrooms.  In a world of visual stimulation and technology integration, we are still relying on chalkboards to facilitate lessons on color theory.  Now, don’t get me wrong – I’m blessed to be teaching at all in a recession, although a better-prepared classroom would enhance the students’ learning experience ten-fold. 
Not having a shared vision for technology integration is a huge setback in our district.  The district wants teachers to engage students in our classes, although our computers are outdated, and technological assistance is scarce.  From the student perspective, many students in my high school are playing the roles of parents, caring for their siblings and their own infant children.  Many students work after school until 1 or 2 am, and when these teen parents are in class, they are completely exhausted.  It takes a lot of creativity to grasp the students’ attention and to keep them engaged from bell to bell.  Without a doubt the biggest hurdle is the digital divide.   Few students have internet access at home, much less a computer…so how are we to integrate technology in our curriculum when students lack the basic typing skills, or even basic internet navigation skills? 
            In my current quest for more technology in my classroom, I am pursuing a few different avenues of financial opportunities to fund the tech support the art department so desperately needs. I consider myself a “critical consumer” (Roblyer & Doering, 2010, p.51).  I’m looking for change in my classroom and I’m confident that I will always be searching for new solutions and the latest innovations that can help my students to experience a truly memorable art course. 



Reference:
Roblyer, M.D. and Doering, A.H. (2010). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching. 5th Edition. Allen and Bacon, Boston: Pearson Education


1 comment:

  1. The TPACK visual arts taxonomy of student activity types was published online last August as a tool for grounded technology integration. If it is helpful to you, it is available as an open source artifact via The College of William & Mary's site: http://activitytypes.wmwikis.net/Visual+Arts

    ReplyDelete