TQ#1

I started my reading with the text book. While reading the preface, I was pleased to see that the authors' views of changing the way we teach match my views. More specifically, I absolutely agree with the authors in that we need not teach our students how to use technology, but rather how to work WITH technology. I was exposed to the constructivist approach to learning that is mentioned in the preface early on in my schooling to become a teacher, about four years ago. I agree with this approach to teaching as well and believe that students and people of all ages benefit from their experiences rather than from from memorization that teachers spit out at them. Unfortunately, all too often we enter a classroom at any grade level and and in any type of school and witness this type of ineffective teaching. I can say this because I am guilty of this myself; however, with the information presented in the preface and the first couple of chapters in the book, I am reminded of the effectiveness of experiential learning, and I am excited to use technology to learn with my students.

Comparing the text book reading and the the article, I got the sense that the text book was written in a much more positive and reassuring light, whereas the article was written in a more linear, cautionary light. For instance, although the text book mentions about evolving technology by the second and the mass of technology that is available to us as teachers and as students, the authors stress that learning with technology can be very beneficial provided that both teachers and students are flexible with their learning experiences and are willing to go beyond their comfort levels. It also proposes that teachers need to let go of the control they feel they need to have all of the time in the classroom, and that makes me feel good about my philosophy of teaching. Regarding the Koehler and Mishra article, I immediately felt a sense of apprehension, as in the second paragraph, they proposed to view teaching with technology as a "wicked problem." Further reading made it clear to me that teaching with technology as a "wicked problem" is not necessarily "wicked," but complicated and involved. The article went on further to give teaching with technology a negative connotation by referring to is as an "ill-structured discipline." Again, after further reading, I came to realize that the negative connotation given to teaching with technology with the use of negative-sounding terms is not all that negative, but "dense and inter-connected."

Summarily, the text book reading left me with a much more positive attitude about teaching with technology in that the reading was not so technical with a million references consuming pages of text. Conversely, the article reading left me with a much more apprehensive attitude about teaching with technology. Although I viewed the article in a more negative light, I believe, from personal experiences, that the article presents views held by more teachers than those who hold the views presented in the text book. I think the authors of both the text and the article present the view that teaching with technology is interconnected and can be complicated, but I think the views are presented very differently, as evidenced by the information contained in this thoughtful response.