Heath Hallman

SLM:521

Article Review #1

June 5, 2003

In the article, "Beyond Hardware", from the July, 1999, issue of American School Board Journal, Michele M. Norman discusses the need for professional development in the integration of technology in American schools. She cites a study that was done by Harold Wenglinsky, in which teachers expressed a lack of confidence in technological competence. She then discusses the financial aspects of the problem. Norman then provides some examples of successful technology programs in schools around the country.

While professional development is important, it is just as important to see where it fits into the context of technology integration. The objectives of the school districts mentioned in the article focused on "assessment…clarifying goals, identifying resources, and developing a plan to give teachers in the classroom what they need." A consulting firm called FreshPond Education determined that districts should allocate resources toward the goal of student and teacher success. Finally, it is important for the schools to balance the spending of money on both technology and the training needed to use it effectively.

Norman suggests the eight necessary elements in a successful technology program that includes adequate professional development. They are:

According to FreshPond, professional development is "an evolutionary process".

I felt the article was right on in its assessment of the need for professional development to parallel technological advancement in schools. That’s common sense. If schools are going to allocate funds for technology, training and professional development are essential aspects of the program. Training programs should be adaptable to the needs of the teachers, they should be flexible according to teacher’s schedules, and they should be open to feedback and change, if necessary. Also, if we keep in mind that teaching is the best way to learn, peer-group instruction, or a self-paced program might be the best way to go about this.

My concern with this article lies in the fact that there seems to be so many consulting groups and middlemen who are "experts" in the field. I wonder how much money is spent hiring these firms who will go about telling schools how to integrate technology, and I wonder if there isn’t a way to go about this "in-house." Isn’t professional development another word for learning? Are we not teachers? It is my hope that as teachers in the content areas gain technological proficiency, they will share their expertise with each other. This, in turn, will create a flexible, comfortable, learning environment in which skills can be mastered without the need of expensive consulting groups.