The 411 on FAQ -- Reflecting on What I Know #1

     When considering how to use technology in today's classrooms, most advise involves inquiry-based learning approaches; however, this is not the only way to use computers as a tool in your classroom. Technology is a very broad tool that can be used in lessons molded and shaped to each individual teacher's style of teaching and preferences. The three most commonly (and most successfully) used models of technology-based learning are (1) inquiry-based learning -- in which the students begin with a question and work to solve the problem as the teacher acts as a facilitator and provider of information (Morrison 12), (2) problem-based learning -- where teachers do not provide information to students seeking answers to a problem, but simply act as facilitators to learning (Morrison 13), and (3) project-based learning -- an active learning strategy that focuses on a problem, yet has a defined ending. In this type of model, the teacher acts as a leader or coach and offers feedback throughout the process in order to help students achieve the end goal (Morrison 13). These are each excellent examples of how to use technology as a tool to facilitate active, student-centered learning; still, as stated before, technology as an educational tool is an open link to a broad spectrum of possibilities.
     With this type of research and discover method to using technology as a learning tool, many teachers forget that tutorials and drill-and-practice software can still be used in the classroom. As long as the teacher plans for the use of such rote learning mechanisms to be used as part of forming a basis for the knowledge needed in order for students to solve the overall problem, this is a great use of technology in the classroom. One example that I can think of off the top of my head is using a tutorial on how to effectively search for a subject using google (such as the one found at www.googleguide.com) and then allowing students to use what they learned to answer an overall inquiry or problem.
     Technology-based lessons, such as lessons using the NTeQ model (find examples at www.nteq.com), do take a good amount of time to develop and prepare for. Like any good lesson, ones that evolve around the use of technology take brainstorming, organization, and preparation in order to successfully meet the goals set. Also like any well-developed lesson plan, technology-based lessons can be used year after year. Once the base for the lesson is set and performed in the classroom, the next year's time is spent simply making adjustments to better it. A teacher should always consider saving his or her lesson plans to be tweeked and reused for many years to come. After all, why put so much effort and time into something if it can't be utilized for student's now and later?
     The big question when considering technology-based lessons in the classroom: Won't every student need a computer to use it as a tool? The answer to that question is bluntly, no. In my opinion, these types of lesson plans are more successful in promoting student learning when they are designed around group efforts. A classroom that only has a few computers can be easily used to promote social growth and group involvement among peers. A teacher should definitely have a plan for divvying out duties within the task so that no one student is stuck doing all of the work (and this is a harder job than one might think unless students are very closely monitored). Even classrooms with only one computer can successfully use this machine to answer open-ended questions and to transform the average student into an information-craving researcher! Teachers simply must put the effort into forming lesson plans that keep students actively engaged in learning environments that promote discovery.

That's all for now! Look for more coming soon --

Works Cited:
Morrison, Gary R., and Deborah L. Lowther. "Chapter 1 Rethinking Computers and Instruction." Integrating Computer Technology into the Classroom: Skills for the 21st Century. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2010. 1-25. Print.