Sensibility in EdTech is a major priority of mine, and our district leadership must provide clearer research-backed positions on how and when tech is used in the classroom in an age-appropriate manner. Tech solutions should provide a clear advantage over their "analog" counterparts, otherwise we should lean on the latter.
We're part of the Wait Until 8th movement, and I'm happy to see that gaining steam locally. ETHS adopted a strong stance around phones in the building, yet I don't recall hearing it brought up meaningfully by D65. As Miriam noted below (thank you for spearheading!), these efforts are interrelated in that they center around fostering a healthy relationship with tech for our kids.
Understandably, our EdTech adoption in D65 was accelerated by the unprecedented circumstances of Covid that forced full-time e-learning. That doesn't give us a pass on reevaluating our EdTech philosophies to ensure they align with our overarching values and goals that span BOTH academic and socioemotional sides of learning. When extra "iPad time" is given as a reward during free time, it robs kids of valuable opportunities to socialize and sharpen creativity skills.
Oh, and in the context of class sizes, I'd imagine there's a correlation between that and EdTech usage.
In thinking about D65тАЩs embrace of technology such as iPads, I think itтАЩs relevant to recall that it was never evidence based but was based on the achievement gap. The thinking was that because white kids had iPads and black kids did not (at least this was the perception), that giving everyone iPads would solve the problem.
I think so, but we'll find out - I'm going to ask them to write one of the questions for the questionnaire that I'm giving out to candidates.
Sensibility in EdTech is a major priority of mine, and our district leadership must provide clearer research-backed positions on how and when tech is used in the classroom in an age-appropriate manner. Tech solutions should provide a clear advantage over their "analog" counterparts, otherwise we should lean on the latter.
We're part of the Wait Until 8th movement, and I'm happy to see that gaining steam locally. ETHS adopted a strong stance around phones in the building, yet I don't recall hearing it brought up meaningfully by D65. As Miriam noted below (thank you for spearheading!), these efforts are interrelated in that they center around fostering a healthy relationship with tech for our kids.
Understandably, our EdTech adoption in D65 was accelerated by the unprecedented circumstances of Covid that forced full-time e-learning. That doesn't give us a pass on reevaluating our EdTech philosophies to ensure they align with our overarching values and goals that span BOTH academic and socioemotional sides of learning. When extra "iPad time" is given as a reward during free time, it robs kids of valuable opportunities to socialize and sharpen creativity skills.
Oh, and in the context of class sizes, I'd imagine there's a correlation between that and EdTech usage.
Well said, Peter.
In thinking about D65тАЩs embrace of technology such as iPads, I think itтАЩs relevant to recall that it was never evidence based but was based on the achievement gap. The thinking was that because white kids had iPads and black kids did not (at least this was the perception), that giving everyone iPads would solve the problem.
This is 100% true. It is interesting to note that zero actual research on student learning went into the decision to roll out the technology.
And the initial funding for the pilot program came from tech industry foundations like those of Gates and Zuckerberg.
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2018/05/02/school-district-65-introduces-access-to-innovate-technology-program/