Today was an eye-opening experience.  I came to the realization that when I have thought of technology in the past, I have seen it in terms of my own limitations rather than the possibilities of technology for my students.  In other words, as a classmate phrased it, I was ruled by fear rather than possibility.  I teach secondary Spanish and Social Studies in a block schedule, which means I have 1.5 hour classes.  For my 14-18 year olds, this is a long time to sit in one seat and listen to a teacher.  While I have thought that I have done a fair amount of scaffolding and differentiation, I believe I have still neglected to nurture the area that would perhaps be most appealing to my students.  Adolescents, as much as or more than adults of my generation, immediately become focused when a video or computer is in front of them.  They engage in a hands-on way that I only observe in a few students in the traditional lecture-based classroom. Even in a language class, where students are encouraged to talk in Spanish, share with a partner, etc., they often act restless and disengaged.  After watching today’s videos, hearing from other educators, I am thoroughly convinced that I need to better integrate technology into the classroom.  

While Ken Robinson’s TED talk was inspiring, Sugata Mitra’s talk was, for lack of a better word, irritating. I wanted to say, Well, googling something is not the same as learning it through a teacher.  Being able to look something up on a computer and regurgitate it is not proof of the depth that we look for in our students' learning.  On the other hand, the irritation I felt listening to Mitra perhaps came from the feeling that it hit a little too close to home.  As a teacher sometimes I feel like there is no point in my talking if only a minority of the audience is receiving it.  If kids are not invested, they will not learn.  In his computer-driven model, kids were excited and learning.  While I still feel the depth is lacking and the results are potentially misleading, I can see the wisdom in his approach and the message he is trying to illustrate.  We can have teaching going on in hard to reach populations, and it does not always require a teacher in person.  And in a fairly affluent community like the one I teach in, how do we create the same fertile soil that reaped the learning in the communities he highlighted, where kids are starved for this type of learning, and not jaded and disinterested as some of my students appear to be?  How can I become more of what he termed a mediator, and less of an instructor?  I presume the granny in the granny effect that he referred to (praising and encouraging while students seek their own answers) is the teacher.  In a sense this would lend itself to the flipped classroom which I am anxious to hear more about as well.  Give the kids the materials or place to find the content, let them study it, and then oversee their practice with our own guidance.

I am excited to learn more.