Learning about technology vital to social, cultural development, researcher says

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -Research has shown that very little research exists about what students in social countries need to know about technology.

Scott Metzger, associate professor of education (social studies education) at Penn State’s College of Education, and Daniel Krutka, associate professor of social studies education at the University of North Texas, began to answer the question of how technology is incorporated and integrated. frame of K-12 content in social study standards. The goal, they said, is to encourage students to learn how science and technology can influence beliefs, knowledge and their daily lives because technology has a huge social and cultural influence. change and the way we interact with the people of the world.

Metzger’s and Krutka’s empirical study-titled “Technology inevitably involves trade-offs’: The framing of technology in social studies standards ”-reached 10 states representing the country’s four directional regions and showed that technology is not ignored but it is “in all the world. place ”within K-12. “The deeper story is, where it is, how it’s assembled, how it’s mobilized, how it’s mobilized,” Metzger said, adding that from state to state, the standards “are unbelievably broken by strange strange. “

The standards rarely frame technology with critical perspectives for questioning collateral, unexpected and unequal effects, according to Metzger.

“We take the critique of technology to offer a technoskeptical framework that educators and scholars can use to question the accounts of technological progress and encourage collateral thinking about the consequences of technologies for humanity. society, “he said.

The states where Metzger and Krutka – who also founded an educational website and blog “Civics of Technology” – conducted research were Arizona, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon and Texas. “Standards have a direct and indirect influence on teacher decision-making, school culture and state-approved book adoption, and the accompanying high-stakes standardized accountability test magnifies this. pressure, ”Metzger said.

He also cited the finding that states prefer to think of technology as something that is studied more broadly.

“Most of the technology references are references to these broad labels such as technological innovations, transportation technologies, communication technologies. These broad categories are more common in all states , ”Metzger explained.

While research reveals very little consistency across states, interplay is widespread. “The idea that technology has to do with the economy, or technology has to do with geography or the environment, that can be interplay,” he said. “States are experimenting with different variations of curriculum arrangements. In that case, it’s not bad that there’s no consistency in all states. That diversity is good.

“What we see across the board, and even more so, is interplay. Almost every talk of technology has to do with something, usually a social impact … or economic, or environmental, or political impact.

The research also shows that to support the application of classroom teaching, standard documents can be supported with a variety of curriculum constructions, including unit structures framed around compelling questionnaires and teaching modules. which can be used and modified by teachers for their classroom lessons. States can create new social studies standards that model critical inquiry into historical and social technology while partner organizations design supporting curriculum products and auxiliary teaching resources. at the same time for joint release.

Teacher educators and classroom teachers don’t have to wait for states to act, their research shows. Research has shown that the goal can be achieved with standards that are smaller in number but offer more opportunities for collateral thinking and technoskeptical questioning. In addition, the standards should be paired with a robust curriculum and resources that will help teachers plan and implement lessons that achieve the goal of critical thinking about technology.

Further research, written by Metzger and Krutka, is needed on how teachers teach about technologies, how students think about technologies then and now, and what the consequences will be if skeptics, collateral questionnaire about technology is implemented in different classroom settings.

“We wanted to write this paper in a way that it could speak to a different audience,” Metzger said. “So we thought it would be something that might be of interest to other education scholars and social studies researchers, because we provide this coding system and a theoretical lens for thinking about it. the subject of technology as an important subject to study in history and society is a major force in these matters. ”

They also want to get it into the hands of policy makers. “We might want to put together some kind of executive summary and send it to the states,” he said. “We hope that as many states in the future make changes to standards that they might consider it and accept that technosceptic, critical thinking for viewing technology as an important social topic. studies, and also collateral framing, which can be very good in social studies, not just in terms of technology.

Teachers and teacher mentors are also on the wish list to watch.

“What compelling question questions can you apply to students today, that you can apply to any technology, and you can involve them in the critical question?” Metzger said. “We did that and we hope that teachers who are training future teachers will be able to share it with teachers and the teachers themselves can read this article and look at those questions and say,‘ Oh, I can. that now. ‘”

Source link

Related post