Philosophy of Current Technology Practice

In the Educational Setting

by Rebecca Merchant

Philosophy of Technology

Almost a century ago, a man named John Dewey wrote a book called Schools of

Tomorrow, and one of the author’s most widely quoted commentaries about the school

systems of that time was, “If we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s, we rob them

of tomorrow” (Dewey, 1915, p. 20). Because he wrote this so long ago, it was obviously

inconceivable to him how advanced the world would be in technology almost a hundred years

later. However, I believe this quote is still relevant today and will forever be applicable to the

education system around the world.

Teachers are present to encourage students to succeed, and if we use the right

resources to teach students, then hopefully that will lead to student enjoyment of going to

school and a love of learning. As technology becomes more and more integrated in almost all

aspects of everyday life, it simply makes sense that technology is becoming more and more

integrated and prevalent in schools and classrooms.

As teachers, technology can aid us in delivering content to students easily and

creatively. It allows teachers to differentiate instruction by educational needs as well as by

difficulty level. For example, many iPad apps are created for different levels of learners. In

addition to helping differentiate instruction, technology can help in the motivation piece of

education as well. Technology is new, exciting, and fun. It also integrates real-world

applications making learning more relevant to today’s students. As students get older they will

ask more and more why they are learning what they are. If technology is integrated, that can

be a simple answer and maybe using technology will eliminate the question of “why” for some

students completely.

Merchant, 2

Philosophy of Technology

In addition to supporting teaching and learning, technology has also made assessment

easier and more accessible for both teachers and students. Technology can help to easily

create assessments and can sometimes be an assessment itself. Some technologies can even

grade assessments, allowing the teacher more planning time.

As a future special educator, I believe that technology will really benefit both me as the

teacher and my students with disabilities. Technology can assist students with

accommodations. For example, if a student has a reading disability, technology can read text

aloud to him or her. If a student has a handwriting difficulty, the simple technology of typing on

a computer can be a well-utilized technology. It is important to point out that the technologies

that will help special education students will likely benefit general education students as well.

This principle of all students having access to technology is addressed with the Universal Design

for Learning model.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is “an educational approach to curriculum and

instruction that uses technology to enable students with diverse learning needs to be successful

in the classroom” (Wojcik, 2007, slide 3). The UDL concept originally stemmed from the

universal design movement in architecture, which anticipated the needs of individuals with

disabilities, then accommodated for them while planning to build (Edyburn, 2013). This same

concept in the field of architecture carries over to aid in curriculum design for every student.

This is implemented through differing methods, materials, and assessments that are useful and

beneficial to all students--not just those with disabilities.

UDL is a proactive framework that “provides flexibility in the ways information is

presented, the ways students respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and the ways

Merchant, 3

Philosophy of Technology

students are engaged” (Zabala, 2012, slide 10). It takes into account diverse learning styles as

well as the diverse strengths and needs of all students while maintaining high expectations for

each student in the classroom. There is also a big emphasis placed on the use of technology in

order to accommodate for different learners (Zabala, 2012). The purpose of this framework is

to “help educators customize their teaching for individual differences” (Wojik, 2007, slide 5).

UDL is made up of three components: representation, expression, and engagement.

The first is representation, which

translates into the brain network of

recognition, emphasizing the

“what” of learning. In this

component, the teacher is

responsible for providing students

multiple ways to take in

information and acquire

knowledge (CAST, 2012). For

example, some ways could be

through lecture, projects, videos,

or hands-on activities or

experiences. This principle of UDL really connects with emphasizing that all students have

different learning styles and through multiple ways of instruction, hopefully most, or all, styles

can be touched on. Last year in my field placement for ED 310, I taught a lesson about

earthquakes and how they affect the earth. I presented information through a

Merchant, 4

(CAST, 2012)

Philosophy of Technology

lecture/PowerPoint, then conducted a hands-on experiment using tin trays, sand, and other

materials, then finished off the lesson with real-life videos and pictures of the devastating

effects of earthquakes. This is a prime example of this component of UDL.

The second component of UDL is expression. The brain network that best relates to this

principle is the strategic network. This component emphasizes the “how” of learning. This

principle is implemented when the teacher provides the students with multiple ways/alternate

formats to demonstrate what they know and prove that they have learned and understand

what was taught. For example, some alternate formats could be discussions, interviews, paper

exams, presentations, essays, and portfolios--just to name a few (CAST, 2012). This principle

involves individual learning styles as well as personal preferences. If a student is very good at

orally articulating what they know and understand, but really struggle with getting those ideas

down on paper in an organized fashion, an interview or oral presentation will likely benefit

them greatly.

Lastly, the third component of UDL is engagement, which translates into the affective

brain network. This principle emphasizes the “why” of learning. The purpose of the

engagement component is to integrate both student interests and abilities into everyday

lessons so they are engaged in the learning process (CAST, 2012). If students have high

motivation to learn and are engaged in a lesson, they are more likely to take away the overall

concepts and detailed understanding of the topic. A good way to incorporate this component

of UDL into the classroom is to connect lessons to the real world and students’ everyday lives.

For example, in ED 310 we watched a video about a teacher who was trying to teacher her class

about how to collect data and then represent the results through a graph. She passed out a

Merchant, 5

Philosophy of Technology

handful of Skittles to each student and told them to choose their favorite flavor/color. She then

told the students that she needed help figuring out what flavor/color skittle was the most

popular in her class. This really engaged the class because it motivated them to help their

teacher solve this problem, and in the process they were taught a valuable math lesson.

Universal Design for Learning is a great framework for teachers to follow because it

allows teachers to meet the diverse needs of all students. However, this will be difficult to

implement if the teacher does not know the unique learning styles of his or her students so that

is important to figure out early on. Although UDL has many positive attributes, it cannot stand

alone as the only framework used in a classroom. Combining UDL with Response to

Intervention (RTI) may really help aid all students in being successful learners.

Response to Intervention (RTI) is an intervention model that is currently becoming more

and more prevalent in today’s schools. RTI “offers students multiple levels, or tiers, of

evidence-based interventions” (RTI, 2008, paragraph 1). Each tier in the RTI framework

provides students with both effective

and differentiated instruction with

varying intensity, depending on the

severity of students’ learning

difficulties. Within the multi-tier

prevention system, assessment and

intervention are integrated with the

goal of maximizing student

achievement. The first tier of RTI

Merchant, 6

(RTI, 2008)

Philosophy of Technology

includes the most students. This is where classroom intervention and differentiated instruction

occur as well as screening to determine whether or not students need more intense

interventions. If it is determined that students would benefit from more intensive

interventions, they move up to the second tier. This is where small group interventions take

place. Tier two implements research-based interventions, progress monitoring, and necessary

personal accommodations. If students are still struggling in this tier and failing to make

progress, they move to tier three, which has the most intensive level of instruction. Because

there are fewer students in this tier, instruction is much more individualized and explicit. If

students still do not appear to be making progress, they are then referred to special education

(What is RTI?, n.d.).

RTI is specifically designed to reach out to students who struggle academically and need

extra support. Before RTI, students were required to fail for an extended period of time before

intervention could occur. Now, RTI ensures that “failure is not an option”. Dave Edyburn asked,

“How long do we allow students to fail at a given task before we provide them with appropriate

performance support tools?” (Edyburn, 2006, p. 20). Providing assistive technology to students

who will benefit from it is essential. If students in RTI tiers are able to access and use assistive

technologies, the teacher can make appropriate accommodations for students to reach their

academic potential. Special education students can really benefit from it as well.

Assistive technology (AT) is defined as “any item, piece of equipment, or product

system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to

increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of an individual with a disability (IDEA)”

(Cherup, 2013, slide 2). IDEA requires that AT is considered for the student in the while

Merchant, 7

Philosophy of Technology

completing the IEP. AT can aid special education students in meeting their IEP goals. It helps

level the playing field for students with disabilities who are working within the general

education setting. AT can include very low-tech devices like a pencil grip or highlighter, up to

high-tech devices like iPad apps and complex computer programs (Cherup, 2013).

It is important to note that not all assistive technologies will work for all students. It

needs to be uniquely matched with the student through a framework like Joy Zabala’s SETT

framework, where first the student is considered, then the environment, then the tasks the

student needs to complete, then finally the tools, or AT. If assistive technology is implemented

properly, it can really make a huge difference for students with disabilities.

Universal Design for Learning, Response to Intervention, and Assistive Technology have

some major overlaps; however, they have some significant differences as well. All three

concepts focus on meeting the unique needs of students and improving student outcome with

a range of support. Also, all students, both general and special education students have access

to all UDL, RTI, and AT. All practices can be implemented to greatly benefit students with

disabilities.

The purposes of the three individual practices are uniquely different. The purpose of

UDL is to provide individualization based on learning styles to instruction, assessment, and

engagement. The purpose of RTI is to provide interventions for students who are struggling

academically in different levels of intensity depending on how much help a student needs. The

purpose of assistive technology is to assist a student with a disability in completing a task that

he or she may have not been able to attain due to a disability.

Merchant, 8

Philosophy of Technology

While the purposes of each concept are very different, all three work together to

provide equal access to learning and success in the general education curriculum for all

students. However, it is important to keep in mind these are best practices as of now: 2013. It

will be essential for me to stay up to date with new practices through journals, organizations,

conferences, and other professional development opportunities. If we teach students in 20

years with these specific concepts and practices, we will not be doing our best to help them

succeed. Like John Dewey said, “If we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s, we rob

them of tomorrow” (Dewey, 1915, p. 20).

Merchant, 9

Philosophy of Technology

Works Cited

CAST: About UDL. (2012). CAST: Center for Applied Special Technology. Retrieved September

19, 2013, from http://cast.org/udl/

Cherup, S. (2013). Assistive Technology (PowerPoint). Retrieved from: Computers and

Technology Discussion.

Dewey, J., & Dewey, E. (1915). Schools of tomorrow. New York: Dutton.

Edyburn, D. (2006) Failure is not an Option. Retrieved September 21, 2013, from www.iste.org

Edyburn, D. (2013). Inclusive Technologies: Tools for Helping Diverse Learners Achieve

Academic Success. N.p.: Thuze.

RTI: A Tiered Intervention Framework. (2008). In Atlas Initiative for Public Education. Retrieved

September, 2013, from http://atlasinitiative.org/tiers.html

What is RTI? | National Center on Response to Intervention. (n.d.). National Center on

Response to Intervention. Retrieved September, 2013, from

http://www.rti4success.org/whatisrti

Wojcik, B. (2007, June 23). Differentiating Instruction for Diverse Learners with Readily

Accessible Technologies. In SetSig - NECC 2007. Retrieved September 19, 2013

Zabala, J. S. (2012, September 11). UDL, AIM, and AT: Complementary Supports for the

Achievement of All Students. In National Center on Accessible Instructional Materials.

Retrieved September, 2013

Merchant, 10