Technology Innovation Synthesis

Reaction Paper #4
Synthesis

Often they are underpaid, overworked, under-appreciated, and lacking their own free time. Of course I mean teachers! The common characteristic that I saw between all the presentations was the role of the teacher as the facilitator of technology innovations that are implemented in a systemic way. Through staff development, bringing recess back, technology literacy standards, alternative schools, the misuse of technology, foreign language development, and interactive whiteboards; teachers are truly the “middles” of the system. Often they are told what, how and when to implement this technology but are left to really make the systems work.
While viewing all of the presentations it became clear to me that the teachers are being given a technology innovation and told to implement it into a system. The focus of the implementation for almost all the presenters was how the teachers can make the innovation a systemic change. This stood out to me because as we have learned, systems are multifaceted and how each part interacts will determine the success of the system. Each presenter focused on how teachers usually do not get a strong “voice”. So in their presentations, they implemented the innovation as a systemic change with the teacher making the authority decisions and making sure the parts interacted in a successful way.
It was interesting to know that while teachers commonly feel that they are over worked and that they do not have enough time, they quickly would give themselves more responsibility like the authority decision making and the implementation power of these new technologies to make a systemic change. So the question that needs to be asked is why? Why would teachers give themselves more work and more accountability? Why did all of the presenters choose to make the teacher the most important part of the implementation process? The answer is quite simple; teachers know that if they can make the decisions based on research and their knowledge of best classroom practices, these innovations will be successful and lead to systemic changes that will last.
The presenter for implementing systematic change through staff development spoke about how teachers should be making the choices of how they want to actually develop. It was a novel concept, teachers choosing how they should become better teachers! This presenter placed the teacher as the authority decision maker.
During the presentation on implementation of interactive whiteboards, it was clear that the teacher would facilitate the how the “boards” were used. The teachers would be the one who would determine if a systematic change would take place. Teachers were also presented as the soldiers that would need to lead the fight against the misuses of technology by students. Teachers would need to development and implement a new curriculum to address those misuses.
The presentation on alternative school programs made one thing clear; the teacher would be the reason for the success of the program using their decision making, command, and motivational skills to successfully implement the program. The focus on the program was between the interaction of teacher and student, and how this interaction paced the way for success.
Through language development innovations, and the “bringing back recess” presentations, we were shown how the teacher’s creative abilities would ultimately determine the success of the innovation as a change. During the differentiated instruction presentation we saw how the teacher would be most effective if they were given a greater ability to make the decisions in the implementation process. Presentation after presentation showed us how systematic change would be more successful if teachers had the authority decision role. What I took away from all of these presentations was that teachers need a greater role in the decision, and implementation process. When changes are made, teachers are generally left trying to put the pieces of a puzzle together that do not fit. When teachers are more involved in the actual process they can create a “3D” puzzle that will last.