Reaction, Module 3, Week 3

The readings this week were interesting, but I could find no significant thread that ran between them.  They both, however, were of use to me as I considered the learning environment for my practicum. 

I found much to agree with and to disagree with in the Mishra and Koehler article about Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge.  I agree with the general idea of the authors and believe that it is important to understand the interplay between technology, pedagogy, and content.  Each area on its own is worthy of study, but the dark grey area of the Venn diagram on page 1025 of the article seems the key.  I recognize in my own work that technology can inform content.  With the availability of websites such as Desmos where students can graph algebraic expressions and display intercepts and zeros of functions and vertices quickly and easily, is it necessary any longer to teach these concepts on paper?  Is there any advantage to knowing the math behind those points or should we just find them on the computer and see what we can do with them?  And from there, the content informs my pedagogy.  Is it better to have students discover the relationships between the expressions and the graphs, or is it better to instruct the students directly and then have them practice the techniques?  Of course, it all depends on the students in the class.  So only I, the mighty teacher, have access to all of those pieces and components and can make these big decisions.  That is why I get the big bucks!

I do, however, disagree with the authors on a couple of points.   When they elaborate on their ideas regarding teacher training in the area of technology, they opine that learning a technology tool outside of the context in which it will be used is “ill-suited” to produce the desired result for teachers.  I think that is wrong.  Teachers need to learn the entirety of the tools.  If you teach how to use it in only one context, you are undoubtedly going to not utilize various features of the tool that could be applied to a different setting.  As one of my colleagues is fond of saying “Trust your teachers, they are smart and creative and can do the job well.”  Teach them the tool and let them figure out how to use it in an appropriate way.  In the author’s example called Making Movies, the course taught both educational psychology and how to use a video production program.  Well, call me crazy, but if you take a finite amount of time and teach two different skills, then you are learning less of each skill than if you separated the skills into two classes.  I say teach a class on video production and then you can use that skill in future classes about anything you want. 

The quote of the day comes from the Mishra and Koehler article.  Actually the quote itself, “teaching and learning with technology exist in a dynamic transactional relationship,” is not what makes it special.  What makes it special is that the authors use a Dewey and Bentley study from 1949 as a reference for the quote.  1949! The only technology in 1949 was Marcus’ pencil.