This morning on the news they mentioned that Applebee’s is going to place a tablet at every table so that customers can peruse the menu, order additional items and pay bills. This will not replace the server, but act as additional customer service.

Of course this got me thinking about schools and our use of technology in the classroom. I would never propose to replace teachers with tablets, but there is value in students taking more responsibility for their own learning. Montessori schools typically have a list of activities that children are expected to master, but they do so at their own pace. Once mastered, one can move on to the next item.

What if we combined these two ideas? What if we laid out our curriculum on a tablet and had students work more or less at their own pace? Would students take more of an initiative when they were entrusted with their own schooling? And how would the role of a teacher change? Would this be beneficial? Would this be the “silver bullet” in student achievement?
I don’t know about “silver bullets”, but I do know that balance is key. Although kids need to take more responsibility for their learning, having a qualified intelligent teacher in the classroom is what makes the difference. A tablet could act as a reference for students so that they know where they are and where they need to be, but it is the teacher that will help them get there.

A typical class with tablet users could look something like this: students working hard independently, while a teacher walks around and steps in where necessary. At some point, there would need to be a whole group activity where students discuss what they are learning and where a teacher can give a lesson to everyone, regardless of where they are.
As far as workload for the teachers, the curriculum would be already built into the tablet along with assignments and projects for each concept, so planning would be devoted to checking in with students and how to help them get to the next level.

A lot more needs to happen before this can be debated, but it is a good start. Any time we can come up with ways for kids to take more of an initiative in their learning is time well spent. It is always worth exploring!

Tell us what you think! Would you like to have tablets in your classroom?

When I was in graduate school, Whole Language was all the rage. The idea was that children needed to learn skills within a context. Teachers let go of basal readers and flash cards and dove into meaningful, thoughtful literature. It sounded perfect! Who wouldn’t rather read “The Snowy Day” by Ezra Jack Keats rather than “Dick and Jane”? Skills would come up as needed. One would teach the word “fun” only when it showed up in the literature or a child wanted to write it in a story. It makes sense, right? Only learn things when you need them and you will remember them within a context. The problem with that, however, is the context is the story, not the grammar rule or spelling rule; thus, when the rule comes up again, the students must remember the story, rather than the rule.

This is true in music, as well. Some believe that if we teach only notation without drawing upon a piece of music, then children will not understand the true meaning of music. Although it is true that music should not be boiled down to notation where the only thing a child remembers is that two eighth notes equal a quarter note, isn’t it also true that by only teaching quarters and eighths in the early years, children fail to see the bigger picture – the relationships between the notes and how we apply those relationships to meter. When we look at notation by itself in relation to itself, we focus on that one thing. We begin to see patterns within that context. It is these patterns we remember easily. When we teach only quarters and eighths in the early grades, we are robbing children of the opportunity to see how logical music is. When they see all of the notes at once, they will notice patterns. They will be able to construct the knowledge that two eighths equal a quarter without you having to say a word. They will also notice that the quarter note rest is related to the quarter note sound. They make the connection, so they remember it better.

When you look up the definition of Whole Language, it is often associated with a constructivist view. The view that we start with the whole and then figure out the parts, rather than the Transmission Models of instruction of starting with the parts and then creating the whole. I don’t see these views as mutually exclusive. Can’t children construct their knowledge if they are given the necessary information and tools? When students have many experiences with a concept, both whole to parts and parts to whole, then they will have looked at a language from all sides. Only then can they truly understand it.

I don’t think “Dick and Jane” will ever be an exciting read, but it had its place in teaching reading, and so do its modern progeny. Kids still need to learn the mechanics of how to read both English and music; our job now is to make it more authentic. The idea is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but to take what we have learned from the past and apply it to the future. Children will always benefit from constructing their knowledge. The fun for their teachers is in creating new ways for them to do that!