ICT training begins with every teacher
There are certain skills and standards which we expect all teachers to have. In Australia these standards are now prescribed by a federal body - the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) in a single document. Required ICT skills for teachers are poorly defined, and even poorer in application.
Reading the AITSL professional standards - the second standard "know the curriculum and how to teach it" is an interesting beast.The standard is split into 6 parts, and 4 levels. The 4 levels refer to levels of experience, (student teacher, new teacher, experienced teacher, and leading teacher), the 6 parts relate to different aspects of the standard. In particular pay attention to the sub standards 2.5 and 2.6.
Literacy and numeracy have long been the focus of cross curriculum teaching. It is widely recognised that every teacher teaches literacy, and numeracy. It is almost a source of professional embarrassment for all teachers to miss literacy and numeracy opportunities, or make errors. These standards are appropriate.
ICTs however are a very different kettle of fish. Everyone knows they are important. Professional bodies such as AITSL, and previously the Queensland College of Teachers tell us so frequently. The media tells us that our students live in a ICT enveloped world. The professional standard holds leading teachers to be able to show a junior teacher how to use an application on a computer. There is nothing about using ICT as a tool to communicate, evaluate, or even make our jobs easier.
Why should graduate teacher not "know and understand" how ICT is used in their teaching area. This is a much deeper knowledge than using ICT to expand learning opportunities. This is the difference between a maths teacher knowing and understanding how to use a spreadsheet, and explaining the difference between absolute and relative cell references, rather than printing off a step by step guide of how to prepare a budget in excel. This is a huge difference, and whilst we accept teachers who can't use the tech, then we will get students who don't get the tech.
Recently I was sat in a meeting with a room full of what AITSL would call "lead teachers". One task was for us to collaboratively write an introduction to a report. Being a tech-savvy teacher, I opened up my laptop, started up a Google Docs document, invited everyone in the room to join me in editing the document, emailed them the link and...
...There was actually a scream!
The idea of being able to work on the same document at the same time was odd enough. The thing that really threw some of my colleagues was that they could use a word processor that wasn't Microsoft word.
Half the teachers in the room (of about 8) managed to pick up on what was happening and managed to chip in some information. The other half looked on in wonder as 5 sentences wrote themselves on their laptops simultaneously. This is after I had run a number of voluntary seminars using exactly the same tools only a couple of weeks previously.
Google have done their job with a fantastic UX which is trimmed down enough that people are not tempted into their bad word habits. Google Drive is simple, and very effective at showing exactly what collaborative working using cloud computing could and should be. Teachers are worth teaching, when a teacher uses a tool in the classroom, students pick up on what it is, and why they need it. Tech savvy teachers are still the minority, and these teachers actively seek out innovative ways of improving their skills. The majority of teachers need to learn basic skills. Ultimately and unfortunately it is the standards which they are held accountable to, that will be the drivers for any change.
PS: Google - if you want a teacher who can teach tech to teachers - I'm willing to try.
Reading the AITSL professional standards - the second standard "know the curriculum and how to teach it" is an interesting beast.The standard is split into 6 parts, and 4 levels. The 4 levels refer to levels of experience, (student teacher, new teacher, experienced teacher, and leading teacher), the 6 parts relate to different aspects of the standard. In particular pay attention to the sub standards 2.5 and 2.6.
Literacy and numeracy have long been the focus of cross curriculum teaching. It is widely recognised that every teacher teaches literacy, and numeracy. It is almost a source of professional embarrassment for all teachers to miss literacy and numeracy opportunities, or make errors. These standards are appropriate.
ICTs however are a very different kettle of fish. Everyone knows they are important. Professional bodies such as AITSL, and previously the Queensland College of Teachers tell us so frequently. The media tells us that our students live in a ICT enveloped world. The professional standard holds leading teachers to be able to show a junior teacher how to use an application on a computer. There is nothing about using ICT as a tool to communicate, evaluate, or even make our jobs easier.
Why should graduate teacher not "know and understand" how ICT is used in their teaching area. This is a much deeper knowledge than using ICT to expand learning opportunities. This is the difference between a maths teacher knowing and understanding how to use a spreadsheet, and explaining the difference between absolute and relative cell references, rather than printing off a step by step guide of how to prepare a budget in excel. This is a huge difference, and whilst we accept teachers who can't use the tech, then we will get students who don't get the tech.
Recently I was sat in a meeting with a room full of what AITSL would call "lead teachers". One task was for us to collaboratively write an introduction to a report. Being a tech-savvy teacher, I opened up my laptop, started up a Google Docs document, invited everyone in the room to join me in editing the document, emailed them the link and...
...There was actually a scream!
The idea of being able to work on the same document at the same time was odd enough. The thing that really threw some of my colleagues was that they could use a word processor that wasn't Microsoft word.
Half the teachers in the room (of about 8) managed to pick up on what was happening and managed to chip in some information. The other half looked on in wonder as 5 sentences wrote themselves on their laptops simultaneously. This is after I had run a number of voluntary seminars using exactly the same tools only a couple of weeks previously.
Google have done their job with a fantastic UX which is trimmed down enough that people are not tempted into their bad word habits. Google Drive is simple, and very effective at showing exactly what collaborative working using cloud computing could and should be. Teachers are worth teaching, when a teacher uses a tool in the classroom, students pick up on what it is, and why they need it. Tech savvy teachers are still the minority, and these teachers actively seek out innovative ways of improving their skills. The majority of teachers need to learn basic skills. Ultimately and unfortunately it is the standards which they are held accountable to, that will be the drivers for any change.
PS: Google - if you want a teacher who can teach tech to teachers - I'm willing to try.
Comments
Post a Comment