The (EdTech) Candy Store

I am  a technology junkie. There is simply no other way to explain this. However, I’m also an educator with a more practical side. I realize that not all technology is practical for the classroom. I also realize that not all technology is FERPA approved in the classroom. I recognize that not all campus computer labs are equipped for the tools and gadgets that I’d love to see my students use, and not all students have a laptop on which they can download extensions and free software. They also don’t have the time to explore everything that I’d want to present to them as a possible tool for their academic career. I will be the first to admit that new technologies turn me into a 5 year-old in a candy store. I always think they are all just the most fascinating tools and gadgets in the world. At least for the first 10 minutes. My venture through a new technology–be it an iPhone app, new piece of software, or web tool–always begins with my own tinkering and toying quickly followed by what is now my standard question:

What can I do with this in my classroom?

Sometimes, the answer is nothing at all. Sometimes the answer is introducing this to my students and letting them decide on their own what to do with the tool outside the classroom. Other times the answer is a detailed “tech day” in class. Over the past few years, I think I’ve introduced my students to some very worthy technologies. There is Dropbox to avoid the “I left my flash drive and can’t work on my paper in lab” problem, and there is Diigo to prevent that “I don’t know where I put the article/where I found the article/what page the quote was on” problem.  But there have also been a few technologies that I used for one semester before deciding that the tool did nothing but take away from class time to reteach students a skill they already had with another program. (For instance, Pikiwiki and Prezito “replace” PowerPoint). Sure, these tools are fun, fresh approaches to traditional software, but they don’t solve a problem for my students. That, for me, is the key to shopping in the EdTech Candy Store. Incorporating any new technology into my classes is a balancing act. I plan my semesters very carefully. This planning is not only in terms of the readings and assignments I require, but also in terms of the technologies incorporated in the course. I keep in mind the number of different places I require my students to use and how many new technologies I am requiring them to learn from these sites. For instance, my Composition II class this semester will use Google Groups, Google Sites, Blogger, and Google Docs as required sites. I am introducing a few other technologies, though these are not required for use, but rather recommendations. Of course, one of these sites will be Diigo for many reasons. Realistically, I’m not happy with this number of sites, but I will make it work this semester. I am hoping to greatly decrease this number for my next Composition II class by replacing both Google Groups and Blogger with Diigo. Unfortunately, that is just not possible this semester. Why not?  Well, it doesn’t fit the balance of my technology pedagogy just yet.

Visiting the Candy Store Like an Adult

Each semester break, I spend an unfathomable amount of time online checking out new tools and gadgets. I am always looking for appropriate technologies that aid my students and further specific literacies I expect students leaving my courses to have in their toolboxes. So, before I begin planning a new semester, I sit down with my shopping list and start to think beyond the 5 year-old mentality about the technologies I’ve selected. Below, I explain this selection process using the tools I considered for this semester’s Composition II course. Keep in mind, that this process always begins with the tools I used in the previous semester’s course (e.g., Composition I in the fall semester) and tools I used the previous time I taught this course if they are still available. The last time I taught Composition II I was using Blackboard as a requirement, and Diigo and Dropbox as optional tools (based on the reading of FERPA and the guidelines provided by TWU).

Usability

The first step to selecting technologies is to consider usability in the classroom, in students’ work outside the classroom, and in relation to assignments required for the course. For example, this semester’s shopping list included Dropbox, Diigo and the Google Apps suite as potential technologies. Considering a technology, I ask myself the following questions:

• How much time in class is required to teach students the technology?
• How many students are familiar with technology already?
• Which specific assignments will the technology assist?

I look for technologies that provide usability benefits throughout the semester and require less than a class period to teach students the technology. I also look for technologies that function in ways intuitive to student’s existing literacies. For example, my students can set up their basic Dropbox site in under 5 minutes from the website and it takes approximately an additional 5 minutes to download the program on their personal computers. Diigo takes approximately the same the amount of time to set-up and install the toolbar. Google Apps (Google Groups, Google Sites, and Google Docs) don’t require any installation or sign-up since I teach at a university where Google is native to student accounts. I also look for technologies that work across assignments. For example, Diigo will assist students in all 4 of their major assignments and 2 of the minor assignments this semester. Dropbox can be an aid to all the major assignments, but not the minor assignments. The full Google Apps suite will work with all the assignments I’ve planned for the semester. Once I assess technologies for their usability, I eliminate those that will simply demand too much time in class for set-up and those that are not beneficial to more than one assignment. The key to good technology pedagogy is that the technologies you use in the class do not overwhelm the students with detailed set-up/installation/learning needs. Technology needs to aid students in their semester, not require endless hours of learning in the classroom. Technology also needs to be something I can model in the classroom and answer student questions without leaving the classroom. If I can’t use Diigo in my classroom, how can I teach my students to use the site for their own assignments? This brings me to the next phase of my technology selection–IT support.

IT Support

No matter how well you know a technology, you must consider IT in your course selection. Trust me on this–I’ve made this mistake in the past and will not make it again.All of the technologies I select have a basic web component, which can be used without the support of IT. Often, though, technologies I select have some external component that may not be accessible without the blessing and support of IT. Google’s features are completely accessible online with no additional computer needs. Since Google is used by the university, I don’t have to get permission to use their tools in my classroom. However, this is not true for all technologies. For example, Diigo’s advanced features require a toolbar installed on the computer used; Dropbox has a small program that assists in using the site’s sync features without needing constant access to the website. Now, I can walk my students through both downloads either in class or via a tutorial on the class website/blog/YouTube channel depending on what I feel will work best for the majority of the students. This still leaves me with three areas that I need to explore with the IT staff before implementing in my classroom:

• How are these technologies currently being used on campus?
• How many hours of troubleshooting should I expect?
• How do students access the technology on campus computers?

One lesson I’ve learned in the past few years is that technologies may be accessible to faculty and students even if they are not openly advertised on the school website. Now, this is not the case with all technologies, obviously, but you don’t know if you don’t ask. I return to my example with Dropbox. When I first started using Dropbox, the product was new and I thought it was brilliant. I immediately downloaded it to the office computer. Before my files were through syncing, IT had taken over access of my computer and started looking for the program that was “pinging their software oddly.” IT had not discovered Dropbox yet and thought my computer had downloaded a virus. I learned my lesson. So this fall, I inquired of IT about using Dropbox (it’s now been around at least 3 years, and has gotten a good bit of publicity). I spoke to our IT Specialist, Matt, about installing Dropbox on my office computer. Matt gave me a peculiar look and asked if I hadn’t done that already. I quickly found out that not only was Dropbox supported by Campus Computing, it had been endorsed and recommended. When I talk to IT, I like to find out what they know about the technology I’m implementing, whether they are aware of other tools that may work more effectively, and what I need to get the approval of IT to use the technology. With a tool that requires a computer component or a browser plug-in, working with IT is crucial to successfully helping students learn both the technology and the literacy skills that drive the pedagogy. Trust me–I’ve tried this; I wrote a dissertation on the topic. Without appropriate modeling and in-class instruction, students are more prone to abandon technologies unless required for class grades. If required, students who struggle may not always turn to the instructor for help; some will turn to IT staff. This is just one more reason to enlist the support and advice of the IT staff before incorporating a new technology into a course.

Student Needs

Once I know which technologies will receive appropriate IT backing, I assess them based on the specific needs of my students for the specific course I am planning. Introducing a technology that does not benefit the students’ academic needs is futile and monopolizes precious class time. Keeping this in mind, I continue my assessment of course technologies with the following questions:

• What course goals and assignments does the technology enhance and assist?
• How many different technology sites are students required to use?
• How will the technologies assist students in their academic pursuits after this class?

Considering technologies that assist student needs in a course should look at all 3 of these questions concurrently. Technologies in a classroom need to supplement the learning of students for the specific course, but should also introduce students to technologies they can use in other classes both during and beyond the current semester. The goal to using technologies in any course, beyond supplementing the course materials, is to help students acquire technological literacies useful in the course, the student’s academic lives, and later in the student’s career. However, overwhelming students with too many technologies to master in a semester becomes detrimental to student learning. Thus, looking for an individual technology or two that will meet student needs is more beneficial than introducing students to a plethora of new technologies. This also reduces the number of entry points for the course. To return to my previous example, this semester’s Composition II class could go two ways. My students are required to blog, keep up group discussions, write an annotated bibliography and a research paper, and put together a multimodal version of their research paper. With IT approval for Diigo, the blog and group discussions along with research for the other projects, can all be accomplished using Diigo. If Diigo cannot be used for Composition II, my alternative plan would be to use the Google Apps available through the university. This suite lets me use Blogger for the blog, Google Groups for the discussions, and teach students to use their research blog to store their research. It also allows me to provide them with the ability to submit their papers through Google Docs. While this sounds like a lot of different access points, each site is reached through the same link on the students’ email. In both cases, the students learn similar technologies and expand both their information and technological literacies.

Course Pedagogy

Ensuring the technologies not only align with student needs, but also with my course pedagogy is another concern I explore before finalizing my decision. To date, I haven’t considered a technology that works against my pedagogy, but I have found that some work better than others. I look for tools similar to the ones I am considering before making this decision to ensure the technologies I introduce in my class are the ones most aligned with what I want the students to carry away from my class. For example, when I first introduced Diigo to my students, I explored both Delicious and Stumble Upon before choosing Diigo as the most beneficial to reinforcing my pedagogy. All 3 sites provide users with a way to classify and store web links, which helps me encourage students to collect their resources in a single location to refer back to as the semester progresses. Diigo, unlike the others, also allowed students to highlight portions of the text and make annotations for future reference. These features gave me the chance to further encourage my students to annotate the texts they read. I have always encouraged annotations, so Diigo furthered that portion of my pedagogy more than similar sites.

Practicality

The final consideration I give to these potential technologies is practicality. I believe that part of our jobs as educators is to enhance students’ information and technology literacies. I am passionate in this belief, but I do not believe these literacies need to be enhanced with redundant technologies. Earlier in this post, I discussed the elimination of PikiWiki from my technology toolbar. This occurred because, after using the site for a semester, I realized that there was a much more practical way to teach students the lesson I was trying to enhance with PikiWiki.

I introduced PikiWiki after several semesters of bad presentations in courses. Students, required to use PowerPoint, were creating lengthy presentations that were packed with text they then read to their peers. Pikiwiki gives users a specific amount of space to use, and I thought this would lead to better presentations. In the end, the site had no effect on the student presentations because the time spent in class teaching them PikiWiki was time that should have been devoted to further explaining how to use a visual. I realized quickly that giving students a limit on the number of slides they could use and expanding the discussion on PowerPoint as a visual aid was much more practical to the goals I tried to accomplish with PikiWiki.

Final Thoughts

In the end, you are the only person who knows specifically which technologies are best for your courses. All I can do is provide some guidance I have found works with my courses. I always experiment with a technology on my own before introducing it to my students. I also make certain to build in the technology as an option before using it as a requirement. This I do because there is honestly no way to predict how students will take to a technology,  nor is there a way to predict the tech support issues and troubleshooting that will come up in  a semester. Technology can be an excellent addition to a course, but the technology has to practically mesh with the course, be usable to students, address their specific needs in the course, and have appropriate IT support to work with the course. I’ll be using Google’s App suite this semester and providing Diigo as an optional too for my students. This decision was made because I want to spend the time I need during this semester talking and working with IT before I fully implement Diigo into my Composition II course.

Advertisement