Now that technology purchasing season is upon us, I’ve been thinking a lot about pragmatism and possibilities.
Pragmatism – “an approach that assesses the truth of meaning of theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application.”
I’m using pragmatism to stand for how something will really, actually, in the real world be used.
Technology purchases (and really, lots of purchases) will be made based on the possibilities of the product. The salesforce will highlight the wonderful things that the product can do. Purchasers will focus in the possibilities that a product provides. Decisions will be generated on the great possibilities of the products. Comparisons will be made. The fact that one product can (at least theoretically) do something may tip the balance and cause that product to be purchased.
Once the products are purchased, the real issue becomes how it is actually used. No matter the best intention, rarely is anything used to its maximum. I would argue that technology in education is a prime example of that. Educators are kind, optimistic, wonderful people. They truly want kids to learn. They have the world’s greatest intention. But, you know what they say about good intentions….
One example of this, which isn’t super contentious, is the Swivl. The Swivl is a base device into which a teacher places an iPad or iPhone (technically an Android phone would work too, but come on 😀 ). The teacher then can wear a pendant, and the iPad would follow the teacher. This system allows for the teacher to record what is going on in class. This could be used to spotlight the students as well. The idea being that the teacher could record instruction, small group work, student responses, etc.
I remember seeing this making the rounds. I ended up purchasing one, trying it out, and giving it to my Tech Coaches, and having them try it out. Our verdict: Cool, but ultimately no one is going to use it. Oh, we had some additional teachers try it out as well. Specifically, we had some instructional coaches try it with teachers that they were working in. Their verdict, “no thank you”.
See, the idea was fine enough. In reality, though, few teachers want to be recorded. Even those that do, don’t want to put a lot of time, energy, or effort into the process. Let’s be honest, dealing with video requires editing. Anyway, no one really wanted to work with the Swivl.
Then….
A couple of my bosses went to a gee-whiz, bang-up presentation at our ISD (Intermediate School District – the level between the local district and the State). They came back excited!
Them: “Have you seen the Swivl”?
Me: Yes.
Them: We need to buy a bunch of them.
Me: We have one. How about I let you try it out?
Them: How much are they? When can we get more?
Me: I’ll loan you the one that we have. Try it out. Have some teachers try it out.
So, I sent them off with the Swivl to try it out with some teachers.
(Hint: we didn’t buy any more.)
There’s no blame here. The sales pitch was solid. The possibilities were terrific. The shiny factor is high. Who doesn’t want to be able to review their teaching? Who doesn’t want the coaches to have deep discussions with the teachers that working with? Heck, one of my teacher friends even spent his/her/their very own money to purchase one. Again, the possibilities were terrific. However, pragmatically? Pragmatically, these end up in the closet. ( *Side note, time to create the Closet of Great Intentions?)
Another example of possibilities versus pragmatic selection seems to be the adoption of a Learning Management System (LMS). I’ve seen the selection of an LMS (by several districts) end up being decided upon by a good sales pitch. In reality, much of the use of an LMS is extremely limited. So, districts end up deciding whether to adopt LMS A or LMS B based on a sales pitch of possibilities (almost none of which educators will use).
One final example. I was chatting about this with a friend from another district. He smiled stated that they ended up selecting an EL program based on 27 things, but they only end up using 1% of the program. (The conversation was also about the money that districts spend for curriculum resources (and how those come to be viewed as the curriculum), but that’s another post.)
This seems to be deeply ingrained into the technology and technology selection. I’ve heard this from a plethora of people in technology.
What’s your possibility vs pragmatic example?
Leave a Reply