In addition, we are not just teaching kids math. We are teaching kids how math is used in the world. Sometimes we add in our head because it is faster and easier, but sometimes we need technology to help us solve more complex problems, communicate our learning, or organize our data.

I need to reiterate that this is not an attack on you or the way you are teaching. From what I have read, I think you really get it. My thoughts and discussion are more of a global discussion about teaching in general.

Good luck with this struggle. I am glad you are keeping kids at the forefront of your thoughts.

Sorry to appear defensive. The recriminations I referenced are apart from this thread.

“I’m trying to have a discussion about why I believe technology is a tool that belongs in math classrooms.”

I’m trying, at the moment, to feel unobliged to a tool, rather, to seek first my students’ engagement, preparation, and whole knowledge. All of those are pretty abstract, I realize, and I’m sure you feel the same, but I believe that once I have those priorities in order, the appropriate tools will become rather obvious.

Like, if I really really want to put up some siding on my shed, I’m not gonna elect a tool that’s new or that all the trade magazines say will be widely used in a few years. I’m gonna use a hammer because it gets the job done easily, cheaply, and efficiently.

I’m not trying to accuse you of anything. I don’t know you. I’m trying to have a discussion about why I believe technology is a tool that belongs in math classrooms. It doesn’t belong in the classroom in every moment or for every lesson, but I think it is clear that doing math is, at times, a technological endeavor.

Often, when I speak with math teachers here at work, they tell me that the lessons we speak about don’t fit into the curriculum. I believe this is a significant problem for our staff. If we are requiring only the kind of math that allows our students to pass a test, we are not developing the kind of thinking students I believe we should be.

Again, I am not accusing anyone of anything. I don’t claim to have the answers. That should not preclude us from having a discussion about the possibilities of what could take place if we all start using our collective imagination.

Whereas your financial planner uses a computer and calculator because that is the best, easiest, and probably only way for her to do her job, technology has less definite value to my math classes.

“Instead, it is a TOOL to help our students access real world data, solve complex problems, create visual representations of their learning, and communicate with the world. That sounds like math to me.”

Maybe I believe that sentence in principle but in practice I have no idea what it looks like. On the evidence of the math-o-blogosphere, no one else does either, yet narrowminded recrimination remains the rule.

If we are teaching our students to think mathematically, we should be teaching them how to use the tools of the trade. In some areas of math that may still be paper and pencil, but it is a hard sell to convince me that those people who work in areas of statistics, spatial geometry, and other areas do not use technology daily to do their jobs or research their theories.

I appreciate your frustrations with technology support, inadequate curricular support (publishers providing resources that work with technology), and financial constraints, but I don’t follow the logic that therefore we don’t need to be using these tools.

I am with you 100% on the argument that technology should not just be some foregone conclusion for teachers to use for the sake of looking 21st century. But when the world is operating functionally differently than they way we operate in our schools, something is wrong. When I call my financial planner, I am not disconcerted by the fact that she uses a computer and a calculator. I am comforted. What a waste of time if she did not. Yet our students being taught to compete with calculators rather than human problem solvers.

I would venture a guess that we would agree on a lot of points here. I am guessing that you want to be able to use your classroom to develop thinkers, problem solvers, collaborative workers, and good communicators. You should not feel like technology is the answer to all our prayers. Instead, it is a TOOL to help our students access real world data, solve complex problems, create visual representations of their learning, and communicate with the world. That sounds like math to me.

While I’ve never had the pleasure (yet?) of seeing you teach live — or maybe more importantly, just seeing you share space with your students — I have NO doubt as to the level of “engagement” that your kids demonstrate based on the teaching mix you offer. Nor the level of expectation you put in front of them. With unabashed confidence.

As to the aforementioned quotation re: tech/no tech:

This was definitely NOT meant as a conviction of you (at least from my P.O.V.). I offered it only as a thinking-out-loud moment about my current thoughts about the larger edu-blog conversation which many of us are merely spinning satellites within its reach. I’m guessing, however, that you sorted that out between the lines. Just making sure.

While my paid-consultant voice still needs to — on occasion — provoke audiences/clients with a range of School 2.0 metaphors, the rubber-meets-the-road reality in my day-to- day classroom practice centers ONLY on a “by any means necessary” strike force when my kids’ welfare, engagement, and potential are at stake.

Here’s what I know:

No technology replaces putting an arm around one of my 8th graders after a hard loss on a brutally cold Texas soccer field. Likewise, no technology mirrors a sideways teacher’s glance (with raised eyebrows to boot) when a student threatens to cross a do-not-say-aloud Maginot Line in a classroom debate…or lives up to 30 minutes hunched over a student-written poem in its 5th draft as the kid wrestles with her insecurity and envious ability being at odds with each other.

On the other hand, 2 blog entries tonight from a kid who has never spoken — by choice — in class for a half year straight, two blog entries that actually showcase legit creativity and passion, remind me yet again that I’ll do whatever it dang well takes to give my kids the right premise/platform to showcase their real-time value.

By any means necessary. Without apology. Relentlessly.

Between you and me, Dan, it’s merely ego-drenched silly business to argue the merits of a book vs. a flat screen (or pick your teeter-totter examples). Frankly, who cares when learning push comes to learning shove. I just want my kids to crush the opportunities that come their way. And I’ve always suspected that the same could be said for you. Heck, even more so.

Marshall M. may have suggested that “the medium is the message”, but I’m pretty dog-gone comfy with the premise that “the message demands the medium”. Might even put that on a coffee mug.

And now I’m off to bed.

Still a paper-based vocab quiz (based on a Flickr image that will cause a bit of hushed awe in the room) to complete in the morning, plus a dozen student blog responses to filter/edit/publish, and a sandwich to sprint-make before rushing out the door with cold weather soccer gear and some Dunkin Donuts coffee come daybreak. Oh, and a prayer that my tie matches my shirt (or at least hides my kiddo’s yogurt-induced stains as I try to get him dressed simultaneously).

Cheers, Christian

P.S. And welcome back from the islands.

Convicting comment. I realize now that I’ve played a large role (though hopefully I overestimate it) in arguing something less consequential at the expense of something really consequential.

To ape myself:

Debating 21^st-century methods vs. 20^th-century methods is a cheap sub for debating student engagement vs. student disengagement.

Whoops.

For me, every class I teach centers on the following premise:

Push shamelessly hard against my kids’ brains. Without apology. Without letting up. Period.

As an English teacher, 90% of this is discussion, reading and writing based. Blogging is just now sneaking in the back door, but only as a side element with extremely well-laid out expecations to support the day-to-day in-class work we do.

You know: Face-to-face talking. Books with real pages. Often paper and pens. Kids in front of a podium. Debates between prepared teams. Memorizing entire poems with “fail or A+” grading options. Occasionally, even some blogging to push on the 45-minute clock a bit. And even a random TED video thrown in because, gosh, don’t they magically make me smile. But ultimately, it comes down to talking and writing. And most of it as conveniently as possible given the time constraints we all face.

Everything I ask the kids to do comes down to 2 things:

1. Do you have a worthy opinion you can substantiate with evidence?
2. Can you frame your opinions in such a way that your audience will care?

In other words:

Hey, Kid: Do those two things on a consistent basis both in conversation (real ones, not just the metaphor 2.0 type) and on paper (including digital), and your “voice” will actually matter. Or at least be taken seriously in the “market of ideas”. Love, Your Teacher

With all this in mind, my kids — the poor and privileged alike — do NOT need me to be an soapbox advocate for any proposed “to tech” or “not to tech” boxing arena. They simply need me to come to class every day (and anywhere else we cross paths) with my A-game each and every day, without excuse or pity.

Frankly, I’m growing weary of (my own voice or that of others) the conversation being dominated by the tech vs. no tech premise. Same with 21C vs. history. Both are a bit played. Only learning matters. And teaching is a privilege that must be earned.

All that is left — call me a radical — is to focus where it matters most:

1. We’re adults who chose to enter the school and/or system that employs us. Don’t confuse blogging to the network with working in your building. Get over it if the building doesn’t fit. Or go elsewhere. 100,000+ schools in the US alone. Certainly a few openings, too.

2. The kids are both digitally native and also foolishly unaware. And so are many of us. Either way, our kids need our passion, vision, and relentless expectation that they can accomplish what lies before them.

3. If you can’t be engaging and relevant, a computer…or mimeo…ain’t gonna change that game. Nor the lecture notes. Can you do so by campfire, in front of a podium, AND in blogspace…and be equally relevant and engaging? If not, the tools rarely matter. Only the intent.

4. As for the tools/means? By any means necessary. And/and. Without apology.

And with that, I’m heading out the door to coach my 8th grade boys soccer game on a cold, windy, and bright blue skied Texas afternoon. Where pedagogy and technology comes down to a very simple premise:

Can you place the ball in the back of the net and prevent the other guy from doing the same to you?

Ciao.