Fall
12
Adapting the pursuit of knowledge to a
changing technological age: .EDU(K-8)
Ryan Giviens
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Giviens 1
Industrialization has enabled technology to emerge and evolve within society, rapidly
advancing civilization into what is now referred to as the digital age. Amidst all of the growth
brought on by this new era, younger generations of children have been gifted with the privilege
of digital citizenship; just as hands are tools native to the human body, the capacity to use and
understand multimedia has become a thought native to the minds of most children. As mentioned
before, the U.S. public education system is struggling to prepare its students for the highly
competitive job environment that is constrained by knowledge and competency. If existing
younger generations possess an innate ability to connect with technology, why have
policymakers in public education not yet considered the connection between these two notions?
Children are becoming digital citizens and it is the responsibility of educators to turn them into
knowledgeable citizens. Quite clearly, a solution exists that utilizes what students already know
to influence, enhance, and teach what they must learn; multimedia integration is the answer.
While some academic scholars are all for integrating technology, many educators with a
large stake in the field of education are against the inclusion of multimedia and pose arguments
that challenge its practicality and its place in schools. However some skeptics, with only the best
intentions for their students in mind, are able to analyze both sides of the spectrum objectively.
Educator Rosita Force understands the potential problems posed by technology, but she
simultaneously acknowledges multimedia as “...a few items that distinguish a 21st Century
classroom from one stuck in the darkness of the 20th Century (Force, 2010).” Force insinuates
that, much like the introduction of modern textbooks cast out the hornbook and calculators
replaced ancient abacuses, the existence of multimedia casts a shadow over what is still currently
being used by most schools. Unlike others, she reaffirms the positive attributes that technology
provides despite her reservations toward an all-out technological takeover. With the proper
Giviens 2
thought and approach, materials of a newer age prove just as useful as those of the past.
Those against the use of technology and multimedia in the classroom may delight to hear
that, yes, technology integration can be detrimental to a child. The presence of any artifact that is
not being used properly can hinder a student’s capacity for learning as well as his or her ability to
focus. This raises quite the red flag when it comes to multimedia as well as one important
question; “what does this mean for the hopes of any technology being routinely introduced
across public schools in the United States?” Well, a wide-open world that provides free and open
access to thousands of games, millions of songs, and an endless supply of distractions should be
considered a flawed educational tool simply by nature. However, one cannot forget that the
teachings of humankind have never been inherently flawless either. If the human race can refine
a less than perfect, constantly changing, consistently wrong stream of information into what
academics call knowledge, one must wonder if the same can be done with multimedia. Even
though it may not be ready for educational use from the source, it truly comes down to how it is
applied: how it can be refined.
If media is to ever successfully find its proper niche within the confines of school walls,
it might be a wise idea to figure out how much space it must occupy. Well, media is the first of a
kind of utility that transcends the boundaries of a human mind, the limits of concrete resources,
and the divides between time and space; it does not necessarily take up physical space so it is not
hindered by this usual issue. The concept of space must still be considered but with something so
unique and ever changing, the way at which it is looked must also change. Rather than ponder
this conundrum with the thought that multimedia and its contents are like any existing tangible
tool for teaching, one must think outside the box. The new question becomes, “what kind of
abstract space will technology integration require?” How much should educators allow
Giviens 3
multimedia to expand the realm of knowledge to the public education system’s aspiring
knowledgeable citizens? No universal answer to this paradigm exists, but if education in the U.S.
is to ever rival that in every other industrialized country, then every child’s access to the world of
learning should be limitless. That being said there is an all-too-commonly empty place for
technology in the hands of each and every student within the system.
According to Mary Beth Hertz, there are four levels of integration by which technoeducation may be classified and therefore four amounts of ‘space’ that educators can choose to
dedicate to their students’ interactions with multimedia (Hertz, 2011). Her multi-tier theory
accommodates the teaching views of media enthusiasts, skeptics, and all those in between. Most
schools within the U.S. seemingly fall below or between the two primary levels of integration –
sparse and basic – in which students are familiarized with a limited number of tools and employ
the usage of such instruments in a minimal educative capacity. Considering that a mean
significantly less than 20% of all students in this country use computers for school work daily, it
is evident that most schools cannot even come close to Hertz’s definition of comfortable
integration in which students regularly utilize a variety of tools in several different ways (Online
MBA, 2010). Although she stresses the importance of striving for seamless integration, that is
incorporating technology into an everyday routine, the public education system is far from
meeting her standards.
There exists an abundance of benefits to a well-executed system of multimedia
integration, beginning with a significant increase in potential for innovation and creativity. As
‘What Would the Internet Do’ suggests, an unfortunate model of consumerism has carried on
throughout the ages, even after the introduction of technology (WWTID, 2012). Multimedia,
bridging almost every gap between producer and consumer, has enabled markets to dramatically
Giviens 4
expand, allowing currency’s control over society to continue. Educators such as Mary Beth Hertz
suggest that current policy has applied this phenomenon to the academic world throughout the
evolution of the American education. Similarly, it is arguable that buying into multimedia as an
instrument for learning would only further encourage this cycle of buy and sell. Is this all
children are being taught when they are exposed to something newer and more expensive every
day? No; Hertz adds that beside the consumer model of technology, students are exposed to
creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, communication skills, and mathematics all in its
application (Hertz, 2012). With emphasis placed on these skills, children who are allowed to
actively engage their digital citizenship in an academic environment will be set for success.
Certain experiences with technology in the classroom lead many educators to believe that
multimedia may also help in the process of language learning and expression. Amanda Litvinov
presents for qualitative research of a class that utilizes a Smart Board to conduct activities in a
Chinese dialect. The experts in the language act as primary instructors for the children, then
allowing the students to interact through a hands-on piece of technology reinforces the material
(Litvinov, 2008). Although over time the method of listen and repeat might render good results,
engaging the children in a multi-sensory fashion through the use of multimedia allows them to
learn in more than one way at a faster pace. Lisa Guernsey, a parent and journalism scholar,
might also agree with this reasoning in her section on adolescent language learning in Into the
Minds of Babes. Just as using technology to support the lessons taught by humans, Guernsey
implies that certain forms of multimedia may provide an adequate home language education with
proper reinforcement by parents (Guernsey, 2007). This reciprocal relationship between
interpersonally communicating knowledge and teaching it via media provides proof that children
are not only connected to the technology that they wield but they can learn with it as well.
Giviens 5
The proper tools can be useful in the hands of any skilled handy person as long as he or
she possesses the proper knowledge on how to work with them. A carpenter would not try to
push in a nail with the backside of a hammer and a scholar would not attempt to handle a pencil
with his or her feet; no, it is with the learned knowledge of which instrument to use in which
application that any human being would handle a task. Media outlets have become instruments
as familiar to children as a hammer is to a carpenter or a pencil is to a scholar. The sooner that
educators, policymakers, and all those involved can understand this analogy and how it parallels
children and their understanding of technology, the better the U.S. public education system can
provide its students with a high-quality, 21st century education. Perhaps this understanding may
trigger the realization that tablets may very well someday be the next textbook and notebook,
Smart Boards the next blackboard, and live video feed the next face-to-face interaction. Children
are now only digital citizens and the time has come to adapt their learning environment to them
and make them knowledgeable.
Giviens 6
Works Cited
Can technology replace consumerism in the 21st Century? (2012, April 25). What Would The
Internet Do?. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://www.wwtid.com/2012/04/25/cantechnology-replace-consumerism-in-the-21st-century/
Force, R. (2010, August). Do Smartboards Make Smart Students? National Education
Association: Great Public Schools for Every Student. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from
http://www.nea.org/home/40355.htm
Guernsey, L. (2007). Into the Minds of Babes. New York: Basic Books.
Hertz, M. B. (2012, February 14). Program or Be Programmed. Edutopia: K-12 Education &
Learning Innovations with Proven Strategies that Work. Retrieved November 28, 2012,
from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/program-or-be-programmed-mary-beth-hertz
Hertz, M. B. (2011, March 16). What Does "Technology Integration" Mean? Edutopia: K-12
Education
&
Learning
Retrieved November 28,
Innovations
2012,
from
with
Proven
Strategies
that
Work.
http://www.edutopia.org/blog/meaning-tech-
integration-elementary-mary-beth-hertz
Litvinov, A. (2008, October). Finding Our Way With Words. National Education Association:
Great Public Schools for Every Student. Retrieved November 28, 2012, from
http://www.nea.org/home/10973.htm
Online MBA (2010, October 13). Surprising Statistics for Technology in Modern Day
Classrooms.
Life
in
the
Fast
Lane.
Retrieved
November
26,
2012,
http://www.lifeinthefastlane.ca/surprising-statistics-for-technology-in-modern-dayclassrooms/weird-science
from