If you are not familiar with the show "Little House on the Prairie," it is about a family in Minnesota that is trying to make a life in the 1870's and 1880's. One particular setting on the show is the one-room schoolhouse where one teacher presented different course material to the students who ranged in age from kindergarten through grade twelve.
Fast forward to the current time and place. Cloud computing is now the age in which we are living. The Internet is a transporter of information, and, therefore, it can be argued that is has become the one-room schoolhouse of this generation. Similar to the traditional one-room schoolhouse, the Internet is a "classroom" where ample information can be presented and different ages are represented.
This, however, does not mean that the Internet should replace the roles and responsibilities of the teacher. Instead, it should become a resource that teachers allow their students to access within the classroom, and, as easily as they could if they were doing schoolwork at home. Can any one of us say that we do not turn to the Internet when we need help answering a question or trying to solve a problem? As adults, we have the flexibility and freedom to use the tools that help us learn, while students are, often times, forced to practice more conventional approaches while confined inside the four walls of a classroom.
Consider the fact that educators are constantly being reminded to differentiate their instruction-- to make modifications and accommodations so that the playing field is leveled for the variety of learners within one classroom. The Internet can serve as a tool that allows students to explore what they need to learn, at a pace and level that suits them as individuals.
It is no secret that education is going through a transformation because of technology. It is likely that within twenty years, because of the Internet and cloud computing, that we will go back to the one room schoolhouse. We will start to see more "guides on the side" where the guides will steer the learning of the students and ask questions to prod thinking. This is an exciting time, and it is only going to get better as technology continues to improve and more individualized instruction becomes commonplace inside and outside the classroom.
James Yap and Teresa Ivey
Thanks for this post - I definitely agree with your assessment but am frustrated at the rate of change. I feel like teachers and administrators who "get" the power of Web 2.0 and the transformative literacies that come with networked learning have been having the same conversation for years. Of course, there are some great examples out there (Vicky Davis's Flat Classroom Project or the work that Darren Kuropatwa is doing in his math class in Canada are two examples that come to my mind), but the rate at which schools are adopting authentic methods to use technology is incredibly slow.
I agree, too, that classrooms can no longer be teacher-centric. In Disrupting Class, Clayton Christensen argues that classrooms must be transformed into student-centric environments. This type of environment promotes learning which “opens the door for students to learn in ways that match their intelligence types” while “teachers serve as professional learning coaches and content architects to help individual students progress” (2008, p. 38-39). I love this quote, yet while Christensen argues for disruptive change by way of software-delivered instruction and computer based learning, I believe in the power of a professional development structure that engages teachers and puts them in charge of their own learning - so they, in turn, can model and teach the true power of technology to their students!
Thanks for the post - it got me thinking.
There is no doubt that the internet and technological tools expands resources exponentially and that future growth will only help with differentiation. I loved Disrupting Class and can actually see the future of differentiation instruction with new software. From my experience as a principal, differentiating instruction is so very difficult and that only the most skilled teachers can actually pull it off. That's a very small percentage of all teachers. Why shouldn't all educators rely more heavily on these new tools to meet the needs of all students?