Keynote speaker Scott Klososky made a compelling case regarding technology. Look at the business world to see how a failure to embrace technology can kill a business. For example, Kodak had digital photography knowledge before many other companies but didn't promote it because they thought it would hurt film sales - they have filed for bankruptcy. That can happen in education too. We have to expand our thinking from being 'low beam' thinkers (next 12 months) to being 'high beam' leaders (3-5 years away). Education is at an inflection point - we either begin looking ahead with technology, or we will be overtaken by those that do.
We (Monett R-1) are considered a leader among our peers in integrating technology as part of the learning process. However, can we articulate where we want to be in five years as technology moves from mobile to wearable? (Do a search for 'google glasses' to see what a wearable is.) When we have our first student arrive at school with a 'wearable' how will we react? Will we be prepared? What about when the transition from wearable to 'implantable' happens? It is coming whether we want it to or not. Do you think that will change instruction?
Finally, technology provides us with the ability to gather and track more individual student data than ever before. How can we use that data to reach each student? How do we make sure that we continue to see the student as human and not a collection of measurable data points? How does this data focus help or hinder the relationships we need to build with students?
At MHS, we have learned a great deal about how technology can enhance the learning process. How can we continue to be on the leading edge (not the bleeding edge) while returning to a relationship-driven school culture?
Thanks for reading. I welcome your thoughts and reactions in the comment section.
No comments:
Post a Comment