Evaluating Technology for the Classroom

Hello world,

Having just read a chapter on evaluating technology, I am actually sitting here perplexed--not at the fact that there is so much that goes into evaluating but that this fact is something that our generation seems to intuitively overlook.

Let's take a step back.

I am on my second semester teaching a first year composition class at the university, one in which instructors are required to teach class in a computer lab one day a week. Last semester, I began the semester thinking that I would teach online research databases and let the students work on their papers those days. It made sense to me that teaching technology to a group of 18-20 year olds would not require much explicit instruction. However, I did not account for one of my students not being within this age group. To him, using Microsoft Word could present challenges, not because of any lack of motivation, but because he did not grow up using technology like the rest of the class. While it just didn't come naturally to him, he ended up being one of my most motivated students.

Fast forward to now, a time when I am now taking a class on using technology in the (second language) classroom. This fact presents two ironies: the class I am employed to teach is a group of native English speakers, and the ESL class I teach for practicum has absolutely no available technology to use. Regardless, I feel like this CALL class will be useful in my future career. Until then, it will at least force me to reflect on my first point: our generation takes evaluating sources for granted. That is, how do we know technology is useful? More specifically, how do we know specific applications, software, and so on actually aid learning rather than serve as a mindless pastime?

The aforementioned class reading goes into quite some depth about specific strategies, at least for a second language classroom, but there is one that struck me: taking into consideration the learning styles of your students. It makes sense. Every learner brings something new to the classroom. Every learner is an individual.  In that way, when bringing technologically-based activities into the classroom, teachers should think of them like any other activities: some will work for one group of students, some may work better for just a few, and some may just flop. There is no magic solution for finding the "perfect" application. No one program will suddenly make learning a language that much easier. (Yes, I'm talking to you, Rosetta Stone.) For this reason, technology cannot overrun the classroom. Instead, it needs to supplement other instruction, and it needs to be done in a way that fits in with the background of the learners, the institution's curriculum, and the overall course objectives.

While this idea sounds functional to me, in practice, I'm not quite there.