The other day my son decided to take down part of an old, dead oak tree. He got out our trusty chain saw, fuel, bar oil, etc., and proceeded to cutting. Within minutes the sound of the chain saw stopped, but there was no following sound of a tree trunk crashing to the ground. Curiosity got the best of me, and I went outside to check on my son.
While he had cut the appropriate notch to direct the tree’s fall, he made the bad choice of cutting into the trunk such that the trunk leaned over, trapping the chain saw bar, and stopping work for the day. The saw was well and truly stuck, and required the help of a neighbor on the following day to un-stick it.
So, what would you say, was the problem with the chain saw? Nothing. It was the right tool, but it was used in a way that prevented accomplishing the planned outcome.
The chain saw stuck in the tree was for me, a visual parable. Choosing the right technology for use in teaching and learning is only one of several important steps in the process of effectively integrating technology in learning process. If technology is used poorly, without planning, without practice, without much thought, we are likely to be unpleasantly surprised when things get stuck, and our students fail to achieve the outcomes we expected.
A Prime example of this problem is, (take a deep breath), PowerPoint in the classroom. Poor design and poor use practices of PowerPoint in the classroom have been (and continue to be) highly detrimental to learning.
How can we help faculty not only choose the right tool, but also employ it effectively when they generally feel so pressed for time, and over loaded with advising, committees, heavy teaching loads, research demands, etc.?
How ironic that in higher education we have allowed barriers to (faculty) learning to become embedded in the institution.