“Things do not change; we change.” Thoreau

Reflecting on educational technology praxis within the framework of Dr. Parker’s exit practices becomes a particularly engaging challenge. Promoting discussion about the intersection of literacy, learning and technology is important in the context of the current climate of cutbacks.  Becoming an agent of change is a significant responsibility because the agent must himself embrace the change and understand how to stir the pot in a positive fashion.  In the first few weeks of school, the question was posed as to how our programs were going to receive technology support and upgrades.  The response from the administration was, “don’t expect any.”  There was no discussion; no alternative viewpoint, no creative problem solving at that time and working under those conditions with a desire to engage and enrich students’ experiences through technology seemed a daunting task.

Throughout the semester, that administrator’s words reminded me that, for better or worse, we faculty and staff were on our own and would have to manage our own systems and learn to make the most of what we have and seek funding sources outside the district.  Within the parameters of what we could control, the conversations eventually came around to an inventory of what technology we have and what we have learned through experience, workshops and seminars.  Ideas to apply for technology and special education grants as well as tech-related lessons and units were floated.

Outside my district, the conversations were somewhat different.  My immediate circle of friends includes teachers from several grade levels and in districts with a variety of capital with which to work.  I was surprised to hear that some schools had underused technology, some had little to use and did not concern themselves with changing this situation and still others had seemed to have priorities that were directed toward student improvement with little attention paid to the role of technology in that process.

In the final analysis, educational technology praxis and how I approach sharing what I have learned and how my thinking has changed to embrace a relational view of technology is a close second in priority to special education legal compliance, which is a primary concern for me due to an impending audit.  Special education concerns and policy changes are somewhat easier to argue because education code is clear in elucidating compliance issues, whereas educational technology praxis has passion, logic, experience and research.  This class illustrates the inexorable movement toward a technology-oriented future for our students and how we might best prepare ourselves to guide them to its safest and most effective uses.

I was excited about moving my school forward in the digital world with its own website.  I did not fully understand how difficult navigating that process might be until I attempted to use Moodle.  I found Google Apps far more user friendly and, even so, was greatly challenged night after night to get the results I wanted.  At the present time, I have more glitches to address and mysteries about web page design to unravel, but in all, I feel that if I were not working full-time that I would carve out time to play with the technology and produce something useful and appealing.  My own process as a learner changed somewhat as I continued to play the tension between the frustration of “mucking about” to create when I much prefer direct instruction.  I heard some of my classmates relate the same experience; that playing with something to get it to work has benefits, but the time invested would be better spent on something else and just having someone show the way would be more helpful.  As I reflect on my personal process and how it informs my instruction, it gives me insight into the way students learn technology and how they are better programmed to play for long periods of time; how their frustration is mitigated by the powerful desire they might have to learn (or conquer or reach a level in a game) and move forward.  I have witnessed this among teenagers who are learning a technical task.  They use one another and time on task to achieve their goals as well as tutorials and forums.  I found that I mimicked my students in the same process in creating my school web site.  As a busy professional and adult with interests and hobbies outside of technology, I still prefer direct instruction in such situations so as to allow me to pursue my greater interests of being outdoors, reading and playing music, but there is definitely value in seeing the teenager’s perspective.

I see myself as a risk-taker; I was a ropes course designer, after all; hanging from trees and cables trying to get my clients to embrace the value of perceived risk and peak performance work.  As I get older, I choose the risks I take more carefully.  To ask colleagues to move forward with technology is not as risky as it might seem.  To model the types of risks that might inspire others to follow and create is slightly different in that risks in education are often a matter of choosing how to invest time, resources and energy and these are often finite resources that one cannot get back.  Lack of reliable technology and support impeded my actual technology integration but not my thinking.  My classmates were an inspiring group to watch as they created things that might not even be applicable because of local technology constraints, but were nonetheless viable and examples of excellent integration of technology.

One of the challenges of Educational Technology Praxis was to flip the thinking from an instrumental to relational perspective.  One of the greatest obstacles is the dichotomous nature of reconciling teenagers’ communicative practices in the digital world of social networking and texting with the fear and contempt generally associated with those practices by the school administration. We have clearly not reconciled this at my school and it will take small steps and small successes to accomplish this.  Educational Technology Praxis did a good job of preparing me to make those steps and argue convincingly for change.  The technology must support the endeavor, however and that is a separate issue; I have longed for a stable, reliable and robust system which I could use as the testing grounds for my ideas.  I am learning that my students are also capable of making use of technology outside the school that can make them whole learners and prepare them for the adult world.  Their reliance upon and obsessions with these various technologies are a gateway to greater and more appropriate use of technology if we are experienced and passionate and willing to guide them.

“Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don’t matter and those who matter don’t mind.” Dr Suess