A TAXONOMY OF TECHNOLOGIES—MAY 9, 2009

 

Intent for Innovation

Time for A Taxonomy of Technologies

The Nature of the Taxonomy of Technologies

Applying Technology Taxonomy to the Classroom

 

Intent for Innovation

-The use of a phone was designed to be for entertainment purposes rather than communications.

-radios were meant to serves as communication between individuals.

            -reapplications and advancements have made these machines what they are today.

-good that these inventions are advanced upon because they would most likely fail if they were used solely for their original intention. 

-ICT for Peacebuilding (ICT4Peace) Organization

-no technology is neutral, there is always an original intention for use. 

-Educational technology is usually based on reapplication of an original design.

-Things such as computers, projectors, grading programs were not designed with the original intention of helping teachers.

            -innovative instructors have reapplied these technologies to work in the classroom.

-These innovative ideas have helped keep the classroom alive with new advancements.

 

Time for A Taxonomy of Technologies

-It is time for educators to pose a new kind of taxonomy.

-A technology taxonomy.

-similar to Bloom, Gen proposes that there are levels in the taxonomy.

            -the lowest level of technology may take tremendous effort to learn and use.

-Microsoft built on first strata—word processing, spreadsheets, etc.

-one to one

-emails—one person to another or to a group of people.

-web pages—one person to a group.

-surfing conducted separately.

-one to group

            -PowerPoint and movies begin with the individual and meant to be consumed by a group.

            -these technologies are compatible with traditional teaching.

                        -teacher is center focus.

                        -learners are generally passive.

-group level technologies

            -discussion boards, blogs and listservs

            -community is responsible for the interaction.

            -these are on-line based technologies.

            -students are also teaching

-networks

            -connect groups of learners to other isolated communities.

            -examples: MySpace, Facebook, TappedIn, Webkinz.

-co-creator

            -the whole is different from the sum of its parts.

 

Applying Technology Taxonomy to the Classroom

-Many teachers think that just having students doing work on computers is a high tech classroom.

-the learner does benefit, but it is the lowest level of technology taxonomy.

-there is indeed a place for it, however it is learning on a simpler level. 

-There are relational aspects to these strata of technologies.

            -Stratum 1= inward directed, Stratum 2 = outward directed, Stratum 3 = shared, Stratum 4 = relational, Stratum 5 = commutative.

            -Stratum 5 = the result is the same even when there is a change in the order of the operands.

            -the commutative nature of technology is the interconnection of networks.

            -these groups share the learning process.

Stratum 6 = creational.

            -the lines between teaching and learning become blurred.—it becomes the same process.

            -Wikipedia is an example.

            -the community becomes responsible.

            -the only true life-long learners are those that also create knowledge.

-Teachers should strive to utilize higher strata of technologies. 

-using the same technology over and over again proves ineffectual and becomes stale.

 

I would have to say that this was actually one of my favorite readings this semester.  I am not saying this in an attempt to gain “brownie points” from Dr. Gen, but rather to simply state that I enjoyed this reading because our entire class was taught around this theory.  I enjoyed Burke’s work, however many times I felt like I didn’t fully agree with some of his methods of teaching.  As Dr. Gen clearly explains, as teachers we are called to teach at the highest level of strata.  We say we are technologically advanced in the classroom, however the activities we are having our students conduct are amazingly simple.  Before I read Dr. Gen’s article, I was just as convinced that our schools were indeed implemented “technology” in the classroom.  However, after having read this article I see that we are still called as educators to come up with new, innovative ways to approach our students with material in ways that are accurately “technological”.