Aug
26
Written by:
Dan Maas
8/26/2009
Being an IT professional, many people ask me my opinions of the value of different technologies. But value is not an easy concept to nail down. Do you mean value in terms of cost or total cost of ownership? Do you mean how valuable a tool is to a proud new owner or the value a tool has to really well trained and experienced educator? Do you mean the value the tool has in various aspects of 21st Century skills and application to learning? Of course, the answer to these questions is "yes.... those are all the things I mean." [;-)
So over lunch the other day I wrote out a simple matrix and scored my values for various technologies in the district. Here is the result after I sorted my scores based on a point system I invented. I made the application and bang for the buck concepts double valued compared to the implementation concepts as I think that implementation is important but not as important as how a tool is used. I've simplified the concepts of 21st Century skills into the four ideas of information, communication, publishing/productivity and citizenship. See my home page for what I mean by these concepts. Next, adoption is all about how easily a tool is adopted by someone who never used it before. Transformation is about how a tool can change the very nature of the work done in a classroom or office. Flexibility is a concept around how many different settings and uses a tool can operate. Next I included how well teachers and students use a tool for their work. Finally, I considered the bang for the buck factor which is a totally subjective view on the overall perceived impact of a technology tool in its adoption.
But a blog is an interactive tool. So I'd invite readers to give your feedback. This LINK is to a survey for you to rate the same technologies I did. I will gather responses and if we get some decent results, publish another table with your input.
6 comment(s) so far...
Re: Technology Valuation - My ideas and a survey for you
The most important part for us in the business world is the using technology for creation of new knowledge. It looks like your survey has totally missed the mark on that one. I would also love to see a Mac utility in education versus Windows utility. The Mac would win hands down and that is something your netbooks will never do. You seem to have the right ladder leaning against the wrong tree.
By Brad on
8/27/2009
|
Ladders, trees and maybe walls
Brad, thanks for the thought provoking comment. You have inspired a number of thoughts for me that I would like to share with you.
I really appreciate your point about knowledge creation as an important part of technology use in business. What I guess was not clear in my posting was my total agreement in that point. What I mean by application is just that... knowledge creation; the business of education. And I categorize the areas of knowledge creation in terms of information, communication, publishing/productivity and citizenship. I chose these four areas because they have been fundamentally changed in the 21st Century. So I would contend that I have not missed that mark, but the fact that the application items counting for double the implementation items, I would think you would see my approach as right on the mark.
The next point you bring up is your belief that the utility of the Mac vs. the Windows PC is what the discussion ought to also include... and that the Mac would win hands down especially compared to a netbook. I disagree on two points here.
First, the utility discussion is a debate around features which tends to lead to a focus on the trees while losing sight of the forest. Invariably, the utility debate becomes a list of features and perceived usability... these are the tenets of the Mac vs. PC debates. But the perspective I'm taking is less about features and more about use. I would challenge you to give me three critical differences in a Mac that a Windows (or a netbook) computer cannot accomplish. Then let's take those differences and walk into business offices to see how often those applications unique to Mac are actually in use.
I would suggest that walking into the typical work environment, you will most often find the following three things. People will use their technology to access and manage information on the Internet and in database systems (usually web-based these days). Second, you'll see people creating documents, presentations and spreadsheets using office productivity software and web 2.0 sites. And third, you will see people communicating using their technology via email, instant messaging and even video applications like skype. These three uses will be almost universally occurring and all three are equally supported by Macs, Windows PCs and yes... netbooks.
So while it is easy to list features that a netbook does not have, I question how vital that list is compared to the list of basic functions I've detailed. And if I am faced with the choice of more features of varying importance or more devices providing basic computer function to more kids, I am saying that I choose the latter. In fact, the whole message of the netbook is a break from the traditional software paradigm in favor of the better flexibility and longevity of the web-based application.
Now, I understand that not everyone shares my view here... hence the survey. I certainly scored the netbook as more valuable than laptops (Mac or Windows), but that's my opinion. And perhaps now you understand why.
Hopefully, this clarifies why I've chosen to lean the ladder against the wall of "use" rather than "utility" (nice Covey reference, although I think it is wall and not tree). I hope some more folks will chime in on the survey and share comments. The exchange of ideas and perspectives is very helpful.
By Dan Maas on
8/27/2009
|
Re: Technology Valuation - My ideas and a survey for you
First off, thank you for taking the initiative in making this survey. We’re all going to have unique perspectives on how this ‘should’ be viewed and with that we know that the data most likely won’t get us anywhere. I’ll give my suggestions not to critique what you’ve done, but perhaps to help understand another techs points of view so you may be able to adjust your survey later on.
I wasn’t exactly sure if I was doing the survey based on my personal opinion on technology for myself, for my teacher staff or for the students or for the District as a whole. I did end up answering the questions as a Tech for my District as a whole though, as that’s what my job entails.
We’re a very small district, with less than 600 students. Although we try not to let our size dictate our capabilities with technology, however sometimes we’re forced by lack of funding and thus will never see some of the devices on your list. Like a ‘Clicker’.
The Technology survey doesn’t include primary software. I would also like to see an option that ranks the technology on how much of a Distraction it is or if it can be easily supplemented with a technology already in place. For example, iPods + students = waste of time. 80% of Mimio stuff a teacher does can be suplimented with just a projector at 1/3rd the cost. Also Bang for the buck is nice, but what about upkeep cost. A Netbook has a higher upkeep cost than a PC, not to mention the cost of replacement due to theft, batteries and vandalism etc. I love my netbook, but it won't have anywhere the life as a student pc.
There are a lot of variable here to put into a simple survey. And a survey needs to be simple, otherwise the number of people willing to take it will drop and the data will be inaccurate.
Glad to see the blog, interesting points.
By Jesse Mair on
8/28/2009
|
Re: Technology Valuation - My ideas and a survey for you
Ah, some thought provoking discussions. I just sat through another Adobe Connect meeting which is some regards is nothing more than a glorified conference call, just as what I believe was hinted above, that a smart board may only be a golorified white board unless used in the right way. I liked the survey and it made me think about the "tool" world of tech, web 2.0, that we have created. I think I understand what you are saying Dan. I like that you are using citizenship, communication, transformation . . . and bang for the buck--that probably depends on the user--as a means for evaluating each tool. I am currently in a struggling phase where I am struggling with the message of "tool" use that we are creating. I think what you are saying, and correct me if I am wrong, is that what is critical in the discussion is the outcome. Is instruction changing in a way that makes a difference in students' education? If we are selling tools then nothing will change but if the tool is a means to an end then there is hope. There are many ways to implement new technologies and get the attention of our students but is it making a difference in their learning. I too am working to create professional development using web 2.0 but I am struggling a bit with the message we are sending and how it is received. I want to see PD that really makes a difference for the student.
As for the survey, I liked it and it made me start to think. As another survey idea for you Dan, I would like to know what tools are actually being used in our districts? How many teachers are actually utilizing web 2.0 and seeing change in their classrooms. And then I wonder if it is the inclusion of new tools or the delivery. Maybe it's the excitement of the teacher, maybe the excitement of the students. Is it the tool or the approach?
By Arlene on
8/31/2009
|
Re: Technology Valuation - My ideas and a survey for you
Ah, some thought provoking discussions. I just sat through another Adobe Connect meeting which is some regards is nothing more than a glorified conference call, just as what I believe was hinted above, that a smart board may only be a golorified white board unless used in the right way. I liked the survey and it made me think about the "tool" world of tech, web 2.0, that we have created. I think I understand what you are saying Dan. I like that you are using citizenship, communication, transformation . . . and bang for the buck--that probably depends on the user--as a means for evaluating each tool. I am currently in a struggling phase where I am struggling with the message of "tool" use that we are creating. I think what you are saying, and correct me if I am wrong, is that what is critical in the discussion is the outcome. Is instruction changing in a way that makes a difference in students' education? If we are selling tools then nothing will change but if the tool is a means to an end then there is hope. There are many ways to implement new technologies and get the attention of our students but is it making a difference in their learning. I too am working to create professional development using web 2.0 but I am struggling a bit with the message we are sending and how it is received. I want to see PD that really makes a difference for the student.
As for the survey, I liked it and it made me start to think. As another survey idea for you Dan, I would like to know what tools are actually being used in our districts? How many teachers are actually utilizing web 2.0 and seeing change in their classrooms. And then I wonder if it is the inclusion of new tools or the delivery. Maybe it's the excitement of the teacher, maybe the excitement of the students. Is it the tool or the approach?
By Arlene on
9/1/2009
|
Re: Technology Valuation - My ideas and a survey for you
Thanks for some very insightful commments and a thought provoking blog entry. As with just about everyone today, we are wrestling with some very tough decisions about how to allocate very limited resources against seemingly unlimited requirements for technology within a school district. Personally, I would love to turn to some reliable body of research to determine what has the best "bang for the buck" in terms of instructional technology. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of conclusive research in this area, or at least any I can find. There is much research that indicates that technology is positive influence with the educational process, but little that quantifies, or even attempts to quantify, the return on investment of any given technology or even the relative benefits of different types of available technology. So, I appreciate your attempt to gather some opinions on the subject.
I do think it's important to consider that while I agree that all of the factors you have presented have importance that they do not have the same importance for all environments within a school district. For example, I would not expect the same level of knowledge creation out of a second grader that I would a high school junior. Frankly, with a strict definition of knowledge creation, I would expect very little out of either. However, I would expect the high school junior to be able to independently recreate a much broader cross-section of knowledge. Likewise, the ability to impart knowledge is far more important in levels and in subjects where students are in more of a learning mode than an applying mode. I hope you can ultimately somehow factor this into your results.
I do have some question about providing a separate assessment of "bang for the buck" for various technologies. Generally, I would think that "bang for the buck" is a matter of how much return you get (application) versus how much you have to invest (implementation + maintenance). While I realize trying to calculate this with any precision based on suvery results might be suspect, I think that people's perception of this factor is also often pretty easily swayed by inconsequential factors and this could easily sway the results. We did an internal survey of people's perception of the relative benefits of available technology and there was a marked correlation with their level of familiarity with that type of technology. I would fully expect that the same bias will exist in your survey results.
I absolutely agree that any debate over Mac vs. PC that does not primarily focus on current and future value is nonsensical. I would further argue that in most cases, because there really is essentiallly feature comparability, a standardization arguement and business case would win in a rational arguement over any disparity in feature set or cost of ownership.
By David Bond on
9/8/2009
|
|
|