In an article published by PewResearch, teachers' opinions on whether digital technology in their classrooms leads to a greater disparity or narrows the gap between their most successful and least successful students was compared in several different categories. In the first graph, the data is separated by community type (urban, rural, small city/suburb, and small town) while in the second graph, the data is categorized into socioeconomic status including low income, lower middle, middle, and upper middle/upper classes. Although each category (besides the middle class which is split evenly) shows a clear distinction of the majority of the teachers' opinions, the study shows their most significant finding in low income classes. 61 percent of teachers who educate students of a low income background believe that technology in the classroom has widened and continues to widen the gap between their most successful and least successful students. Although they observe the digital tools improving the performance of the students at the top of their class, the tools have decreased the academic standing of students ranked at the bottom of their class. These digital tools according to the study include, "1) filters blocking access to particular websites or online content, 2) rules governing the use of cell phones on school grounds, and 3) their school’s acceptable use policy (AUP) governing the use of school computers and networks."
One of the key elements that I believe makes a visualization or graphic good is that it is easy to see and understand. This particular visualization is a great example of this element because of its particular design. The visualization begins with an explanatory heading followed by a subheading that details both the independent and dependent variables. Within the graphic itself, the bars are clearly marked and separated, the increments on the y axis are evenly spaced, and the use of dark and light color to separate the responses/percentages make this visualization easy for any reader to comprehend.
Additionally, a graphic should not be outdated. Visualizations, especially ones dealing with technology in our rapidly-growing digital environment, should be fairly recent from the day it is produced to the day it is accessed. This particular graphic was published on February 28, 2013, which is far less old than the three years of age recommended to ensure a graphic's validity.
Thirdly, every variable relevant to the study is represented. Because the researchers are trying to determine the effects of digital technology on a variety of students in different classroom environments, they have created variables of economic status and community type. These combined represent the classroom environments in middle schools and high schools across America.
Finally, another key element that makes a visualization great is that it gives a deeper understanding to a relevant issue in society. Comparing the effect of digital tools on learning is very important to society today as the development of technology is rapidly advancing in today's society. Certain schools, such as the ones in this study, have experimented with using digital tools in the classroom to see if it helps enhance the learning of their students. What we can take away from this graph is that, although technology in the classroom seems to benefit rural communities, digital tools in the classroom tend to hurt students struggling in the classroom in the other environments. We see this harm especially in a classroom with low income students, as observed by teachers in this environment. The implications of the study shown by this visualization are complex. We can infer that digital tools may lead to a greater disparity in low income students because many perhaps do not have access to this technology at home, which inhibits their ability to use this technology successfully to enhance their performance. Although the teachers see the positive effect of digital tools on the learning and performance of the students at the top of their class, these tools aren't helping the students who need to enhance their learning the most in order to perform better in class. The most successful students may already have a working knowledge of these technologies and, because they already have well-developed knowledge on the class, may have an easier time using these tools to enhance their learning.
The question we must ask ourselves then is, "are digital tools worth using in the class if they hurt some students and enhance the performance of others?" Though it is ultimately up to the school system to decide, visualizations like this that show a particular effect of technology on learning can give us further insight into how these classroom technologies should be handled in the future.
Additionally, a graphic should not be outdated. Visualizations, especially ones dealing with technology in our rapidly-growing digital environment, should be fairly recent from the day it is produced to the day it is accessed. This particular graphic was published on February 28, 2013, which is far less old than the three years of age recommended to ensure a graphic's validity.
Thirdly, every variable relevant to the study is represented. Because the researchers are trying to determine the effects of digital technology on a variety of students in different classroom environments, they have created variables of economic status and community type. These combined represent the classroom environments in middle schools and high schools across America.
Finally, another key element that makes a visualization great is that it gives a deeper understanding to a relevant issue in society. Comparing the effect of digital tools on learning is very important to society today as the development of technology is rapidly advancing in today's society. Certain schools, such as the ones in this study, have experimented with using digital tools in the classroom to see if it helps enhance the learning of their students. What we can take away from this graph is that, although technology in the classroom seems to benefit rural communities, digital tools in the classroom tend to hurt students struggling in the classroom in the other environments. We see this harm especially in a classroom with low income students, as observed by teachers in this environment. The implications of the study shown by this visualization are complex. We can infer that digital tools may lead to a greater disparity in low income students because many perhaps do not have access to this technology at home, which inhibits their ability to use this technology successfully to enhance their performance. Although the teachers see the positive effect of digital tools on the learning and performance of the students at the top of their class, these tools aren't helping the students who need to enhance their learning the most in order to perform better in class. The most successful students may already have a working knowledge of these technologies and, because they already have well-developed knowledge on the class, may have an easier time using these tools to enhance their learning.
The question we must ask ourselves then is, "are digital tools worth using in the class if they hurt some students and enhance the performance of others?" Though it is ultimately up to the school system to decide, visualizations like this that show a particular effect of technology on learning can give us further insight into how these classroom technologies should be handled in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment