home

I chose to address the criticisms in a wiki format so that I may easily come back and change it as necessary. This is merely the list of concerns and responses I would give to parents who may question why were are trying to incorporate technology into our classrooms and spending money to do so.

Education Technology Criticisms:

· **Concern:** Large upfront investment for educational hardware and software and the results of technology use in education are largely unimpressive.
 * Response:** Culp, Honey, and Mandinach provided three rationales for investing in education technology that have been prominent over the last 20+ years. (2003) The first rationale is “Technology as a Tool for Addressing Challenges in Teaching and Learning” which goes into detail about things we can do with technology to allow learning to occur in a different way based on the capabilities of the technology. The second rationale is “Technology as a Change Agent” and this refers to the ability of technology itself to transform classrooms into inquiry based constructivist classrooms. The third rationale presented is “Technology as a Force in Economic Competitiveness” which focuses on the real world importance of technology and the opportunities that are available through technological literacy.

· **Concern:** Educational technology products are too numerous, many untested, and do not live up to their promises. The quality of educational tools needs to be addressed and improved.
 * Response:** It is up to the individual educator to evaluate and decide what is and is not effective in their classroom. Technology is not a one size fits all experience. When it comes to the creation of content; public and private sectors must work together in order to create “quality online and digitized content”. (Culp, Honey, and Mandinach pp.12, 2003)

· **Concern:** No dominant design is in place as a model for what educational technology should be like.
 * Response:** I do not believe there will ever be a dominant design for educational technology. Ed Tech is so varied it would be impossible to create one "model" for what it should be. Cars were referenced as a model for dominant design, but I do not think this is a good comparison because cars have the same general layout. Educational technology is so varied in its functions, it would be like trying say there needs to be a dominate design of all vehicles (land, air, sea). It just does not make sense.

· **Concern:** Institutions need a better method to evaluate the cost/benefits that go with distance education.
 * Response:** There have been several reports regarding technology and costs associated with it. Schools have a wealth of resources available to them to make decisions about distance education and technology costs. Culp, Honey, and Mandinach discussed the “ importance of developing sustainability plans for technology funding”. (2003) I believe this is becoming part of almost every educational institutions budgeting process. This is an ongoing process that is still being developed especially as distance education grows in popularity.

· **Concern:** Distance learning is saving money in some areas; however the money saved is being spent to keep the technology infrastructure intact. So no real savings are seen.
 * Response:** One of the main goals of distance learning is providing access to more educational opportunities to “ geographically dispersed audiences .” (Culp, Honey, and Mandinach, pp.5, 2003) Schools are not necessarily trying save money by using these distance courses but rather expand their reach to a larger student base.

· **Concern:** Labor costs are declining, but overall costs are increasing and the rising costs of technology are directly impacting tuition at universities.
 * Response:** With the infrastructure involved in most schools these days, that has to be one of the major influences if overall tuition cost is being affected by technology costs. I believe most cost reductions (as referenced to using adjuncts rather than full-time professors) are offset by the large costs of maintaining a schools network. Besides, the cost of just about everything on the rise and I am sure that has an effect on schools tuition as well.

· **Concern:** Technology cannot replicate actually interacting with real life.
 * Response:** Technology is not meant to replace real life. It is merely a set of tools that we can use to facilitate, extend, and refine our understanding of a topic. It can be used to supplement and enhance our interactions with real life counterparts.

· **Concern:** We should stop focusing on teaching the “tools” of technology, but rather the processes of learning and understanding.
 * Response:** Technological tools are not the focus of teaching, they are meant to “extend teaching and learning processes”. ( Culp, Honey, and Mandinach, pp.5, 2003)

· **Concern:** People were too quick to jump aboard the Ed-tech bandwagon and did not stop to think if they actually knew how to use it properly. Those teachers are not being provided with the right training on how to implement and use technology for teaching subjects in the classroom.
 * Response:** Proper training and implementation of technology is already known to be an important aspect of pre-service teacher and in-service teacher training. It is an issue that is being addressed already and will only improve over time as more teachers become more comfortable with their new roles in incorporating technology.

Kearsley, G. (1998). Educational Technology: A Critique.. //Educational Technology//, //38//(2), 47-51. Educational Technology: A Critique of Pure Reason This article was written by Greg Kearsley and was published in 1998 by //Educational Technology//. Kearsley’s argument against educational technology in its current state is that our attention and massive resources could be better spent elsewhere. Kearsley refers to technology is “a distraction (on a grand scale) from what matters most – effective learning and good teaching.” (1998) In this article he examines instructional television, computer-based instruction, adaptive technology, distance learning, and teacher education. He raises some good points about instructional television requiring specialized skills and training in order to make “good” television. His comments on computer-based instruction discuss the promises of individual instruction yet the failure to fully realize this promise. He also referred to general lack of interest in games by the educational community though they can provide important problem solving and decision making skills. Other areas he discusses such as adaptive technology have issues with being widely available due to lack funds or knowledge of their existence/uses. His views on distance education are very similar to what we have read in other articles and are presented well in this article. He wraps up his article by discussing the lack of proper training and education given to the teachers.
 * New Article Citation:**