by Jody Stallings, Director, Charleston Teacher Alliance,
28 May 2015
Recently I visited two Charleston County schools where the district is experimenting with “personalized learning.”
In this method, students use technology to complete digital activities at their own pace until they master the desired concepts.
Proponents of the technique proclaim its effectiveness, but the process is fraught with risks. One of the most concerning for many educators is that it demands heavy use of “screen time” – the continual use of iPads or similar devices. In its commitment to personalized learning, CCSD has spent millions of dollars on 1:1 implementation (one iPad for every student) and plans to spend millions more.
Few 1:1 districts report a significant impact on learning, but they universally tout increased student “engagement.” “Engagement,” however, is a subjective word.
For some it means “active mental stimulation,” but many teachers interpret it as “seated and quiet.”
Does this type of engagement warrant a widespread investment at possible risk to our students? A growing body of research suggests an increase in 1:1 screen interactivity may have long-term consequences:
Read more »
Recently I visited two Charleston County schools where the district is experimenting with “personalized learning.”
In this method, students use technology to complete digital activities at their own pace until they master the desired concepts.
Proponents of the technique proclaim its effectiveness, but the process is fraught with risks. One of the most concerning for many educators is that it demands heavy use of “screen time” – the continual use of iPads or similar devices. In its commitment to personalized learning, CCSD has spent millions of dollars on 1:1 implementation (one iPad for every student) and plans to spend millions more.
Few 1:1 districts report a significant impact on learning, but they universally tout increased student “engagement.” “Engagement,” however, is a subjective word.
For some it means “active mental stimulation,” but many teachers interpret it as “seated and quiet.”
Does this type of engagement warrant a widespread investment at possible risk to our students? A growing body of research suggests an increase in 1:1 screen interactivity may have long-term consequences: