Scratch: Making Things
As I am getting ready to introduce Scratch to teachers tomorrow, I’ve been trying to come up with some ways to express my feelings on the subject of students using technology to make things vs. teachers using technology to teach things. I stumbled upon this blog post today (ah, serendipity) by Paul Bogush, and it really hits the nail on the head.
Technology is not the answer to the problems facing the educational system. When it is placed in the hands of traditional teachers in an average school it reinforces the institution. Spending $4000 in that type of school on a Smartboard will just stunningly reinforce a unit that has no concept, no goals, no connection to the kids life, and is not authentic, problem based, or performance based. Moving to 1:1 laptops will improve teaching, it just won’t improve student learning. It is not about what kids are doing or what is being done to them, it’s about what they are making and creating. It is not the “answer” to why my kids leave at the end of the year ready to build a better future.
Read more of Dear Administrator,
Something he said really stood out to me. “Technology is just tool. If you give a tool chest to someone who can’t build a house, they are still not going to be able to build a house.” So, if any of you teachers from Tech Camp are reading this, here is why I think this applies. Scratch is an amazing tool for creation, but if you don’t put time into getting to know the program and guiding the kids to get a good grasp on it, Scratch will just be another “neat” program you’ve glazed. Likewise, think about the opportunities in your classroom that you give your students to create and invent and find new ways of thinking–without technology. Then, imagnine Scratch can be an amplifier for these creative opportunities. The Scratch website has a motto: Imagine-Program-Share. Imagine is something students should be doing in your classroom regardless of technology. Scratch, through the programming and sharing, gives a technology oriented path to solving problems and creating things that kids imagine.
Mitchell Resnick, director of the Lifelong Kindergarten Group at MIT’s Media Lab, the group behind Scratch, talked in a similar vein in an Edutopia article:
Underlying traditional kindergarten activities is a spiraling learning process in which children imagine what they want to do, create a project based on their ideas (using blocks, finger paint, or other materials), play with their creations, share their ideas and creations with others, and reflect on their experiences — all of which leads them to imagine new ideas and new projects. This iterative learning process is ideal preparation for today’s fast-changing society, in which people must continually come up with innovative solutions to unexpected situations in their lives.
Read the complete article, Kindergarten is the Model for Lifelong Learning
If you notice, only one of the six NETS for students addresses technology operations and concepts. The rest are all about using those basic skills to produce though critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, innovation, collaboration, etc.
So, contemplate your role as a teacher. Tech Camp has been a blur of “use this” and “check this out” sessions, but ultimately, who should all this technology be for? The students. Give it to them. Mold your creative, thought-provoking, and deep project work with it. Let the students create.
July 23rd, 2009 at 8:47 am
Well said, and food for thought for all of us as we begin the school year armed with new “tech tips”. Thanks.
July 23rd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
I really appreciate this post: it speaks to my heart as a teacher, and a teacher who uses technology in her classroom on a daily basis. I want my students to truly understand the power in their hands, but so often I feel like Prometheus handing out fire – I’m the one who gets burned! Keeping students on task, engaged with the goals of the lesson, and clear of any tech violations is always key. Thank you for a thoughtful post.
July 30th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Thanks for working so hard for us.
August 4th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
The greatest indicator that technology is “bust” is that the more that is applied the lower test scores become…There is a recent study (Stnaford, I think) that asks “Why?” There isn’t any critical thinking in using a computer. They have become substitute teachers. That is actually more the rule. People don’t want to discuss this because the “importance” of computers may be diminished; however, I would like to share this with anyone listening/reading. I couldn’t afford computers. I had enough money for food and electricity when I was a parent to young children. I had my children read and what happened? One is an electrical aerospace engineer (30 year old). Another is developing an international data base for an international corporation (21 years old. An the other works for a fotune 500 in bringing health care solutions to America. This is a result of reading. The computer was their tool. Literacy and even fluency is suffering. Technology is a Tool. I think this should be every educators bumper sticker.
August 4th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
You make the point. Technology is fairly useless to students if they aren’t already centered in a quality education. What use are tools if you don’t have the skills to make something in the first place?
I really am beginning to despise the “computer as substitute teacher.” There is some value in review games, because kids like them and perhaps they retain some of it, but overall it is a waste of precious time in the classroom. Across our district this year, students in first grade had to complete 80 episodes of a reading program. It was like…a replacement reading teacher. Used as a part of reading class centers, the teacher could not monitor its use while working with his/her own small group. This could have been part of the problem, but overall teachers seemed to feel it was not helpful. Students who were skipped ahead in the program because they were already reading well above the first grade level were forced by the district to go back and complete all of them. Imagine if you were fluently reading chapter books and had to go back and do activities like, “Oink! Oi oi oi! Say the oi sound!” Likewise, students with some serious intervention needs completed all 80 episodes but were still were not showing much reading progress with the teacher (though the teachers were working hard to remedy this, as well). This seems to be a good example of technology used inappropriately. They might as well have been doing worksheets or watching phonics cartoons.
To be quite honest, if the teacher does not have a print-rich classroom, successful best practices, continuous progress monitoring, and generally puts the effort into getting kids to read, a program like this isn’t going to do much. On the other hand, if the classroom has all the right high-quality things going on, a program like this is rarely needed. Instead, centers time on the computers could be used in creating literacy projects or products. They could be used to communicate by writing, reading, speaking, listening with a multitude of authentic audiences, rather than sitting in front of a computer receiving and clicking. Technology is not a teacher. It’s a tool.
Agreed.
And sorry for the long reply…I got a bit wordy, didn’t I?
August 15th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Amen, you said it well on the 80 episode program that will remain nameless.
First Grade Teacher,
Amy
September 10th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Will be starting to use Scratch for a middle school elective in the 2nd Semester. Thanks for blogging about your experience! Keep the posts coming, I hope to learn a lot from you, if you don’t mind?
Thanks!