Educational Technology Vision Statement

This assignment gave me an opportunity to write an educational technology vision statement for my organization. I work as the Director of Educational Technology for the Riverside County Office of Education (RCOE). In that capacity, I work with RCOE’s own internal programs and with all 23 school districts in Riverside County.

The vision of the Educational Technology Services (ETS) unit is to support the education of students in the knowledge, skills, dispositions, and practices that will enable them to thrive in the digital world.

In order to achieve that vision, ETS will:

• Provide consultation and facilitation in the design, development, and implementation of educational technology services and applications to support the learning goals of school districts and the program goals of RCOE
• Plan, organize, design, support and deliver professional development to advance the understanding and application of educational technology approaches in the Common Core State Standards and the general instructional programs
• Facilitate leadership for administrators in the efficient and effective application of technology
• Keep apprised of the current and emerging trends in educational technology
• Disseminate best practices in educational technology with the Riverside County community

Research supports both the constraints and the affordances of educational technology. For example,

Clark (2012) points out very simply that there is no evidence that media or media attributes influence learning. When Clark wrote that he had reviewed 70 years worth of research studies on the topic. That is a mountain of evidence that is difficult to argue with. In counterpoint, Kozma (2012) argues that some students will benefit from a particular medium’s characteristics. Kozma insists that both medium and method are part of instructional design and are then tied together. 

Though I give Clark the edge in this debate, I did have a pretty strong negative reaction to one of his claims. Clark (2012, p.175) stated that “...if different media or attributes yield similar learning gains...we must always choose the less expensive way...” I take that as a very narrow view of the mission of education. I think I understand his point to be that if teachers can get the same results without using computers (as an example of a media) then we should not be wasting money on expensive computers. That argument assumes that achievement is the only goal of education. We can certainly educate students without the tools of the 21st century. It was done that way for a long time. However, by always doing things the least expensive way possible, we are not doing our job of preparing students for college and the workplace.

References:

Clark, R. E. (2012). The media versus methods issue.  In R. E. Clark (Ed.) Learning from media: Arguments, analysis, and evidence (2nd ed.), (pp. 173-185). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

Kozma, R. B. (2012). Robert Kozma’s counterpoint theory of “learning with media.” In R. E. Clark (Ed.) Learning from media: Arguments, analysis, and evidence (2nd ed.), (pp. 103-145). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.