Did you ever give any thought to doors? Right now you are probably thinking, “Why would I ever give a thought to doors?” Hold that thought for later. We never question doors. They come with every house. There are inside doors and outside doors. We build entrance ways to enhance doors. We adorn them with brass kick plates and fancy handles and elaborate locking systems. We never question their value. We never even have to think about how they work. We do not stand in front of them to contemplate their hinges, or handles. We use them without thought. It becomes almost instinctive. They are everywhere, on closets, on cabinets, on furniture, on cars, even on shower stalls. We accept and use them everywhere and the most thought given is probably the thought traveling through your brain right now.
In order to give this post a little more to write about, I would add a few more household necessities: the refrigerator, stove, television, and telephone. Can you imagine an average American home without these tools or a door to offer protection for them? Yes, there are people who choose not to make these tools part of their life, but that is a rare choice. It does not mean that these people have no understanding of these tools. I would be safe in saying that they represent a very small portion of our population. By this point you should have an inkling of where I am taking you with this.
I am a post WWII child. David Letterman and I are the same age. In the old days we were the Baby Boomers, or The Boomer generation. Now, as a group we are affectionately referred to as the Old Fart Generation. Even at my age however, there was never a time when I did not have a refrigerator, stove, television, or a telephone. They look very different from the 1940’s, but they still are useful tools for the purpose each serves. We have little choice in their use. They are similar to the door in that we no longer need to think about their use or purpose. It is a given.
We often think that we have choices in life and we do, but not everything is a choice. There are some things that our society, or culture, or government chooses for us. As Educators we once had a choice to use technology as a tool for teaching and learning. It was an expensive tool and there was a big gap between haves and have-nots. It was financially beneficial to schools if teachers chose not to use Tech as a teaching tool. Training, time and money were the obstacles of choice for change.
Now let us consider the objective of our teaching. I always thought I was preparing my students to be able to think and learn in their world, for that is where and when they will live. I am not teaching them to live in the 1940’s, 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, 00’s as I did. God I am getting old. The choice of technology as a teaching tool is no longer mine to make. My choice is how best to use it. Look around! Computers are everywhere. Computers that run our cars are probably more functional than those which were used to send men to the moon. I am not so arrogant to think that I can offer a student all he/she needs to know based on what I know.
For the generations to come technology is going to be like doors. It will be everywhere and people will not even have to consider its use. As educators why would we fight that evolution? Why are we not using that power to promote creative thought? Why do we have educators resistant to something that will continue to grow and improve the way we access, analyze, consume and communicate information?
The dumbest argument I remember from Math teachers in the 60’s about the use of calculators in Math class was;” What would happen if there were no more batteries. They need to know how to work without calculators for that reason.”We believed that back then. We were not stupid, but maybe a little unaware. It was a knee jerk reaction to technology. I guess math teachers had a fear of being replaced by calculators. That was a fear shared by many educators back in the day-being replaced by a computer.
We all look at something the same way, but many of us see it differently. I would like us to get to the point where we only have to think about how to best use technology and not whether we should use it. Yes, I agree, a good teacher can teach without technology and that will always be true. Yes, I agree, Technology does not have to be in every lesson. Yes, I agree, technology is not the answer to everything. Technology, however, is with us to stay and it is evolving. As educators we need to evolve too. These kids need to be educated for their world not ours. In their world Technology may be as ubiquitous as doors are.
My Island View 
Ran into this quote today by David Warlick that I thought was appropriate for yours, “”Do not be excited by the light of technology. Instead, be excited by what we can shine light on,
with and because of technology.”
On this note, I think you make a great point that some day technology will be like a door and widely accepted. I believe we have to move from the acceptance stage to the stage where we begin to learn how to implement technology effectively.
A well written piece. I especially enjoyed how you describe how some affordances of technology become so commonplace we simple ignore “the doors.”
I live near a lock museum (yes… really there is a museum of locks in Plymouth, CT) and I am reminded about how a simple technology, such as doors, has evolved. Many doors now have computers as part of the hinge mechanism. Yet they go noticed.
I know its cliche, all the best metaphors are, but I often saw teachers as keyholders. We could point the students to the doors, slide the key in and move the barrles of the locks, but they had to walk in.
It isn’t that way anymore with technology. We have to teach students to be locksmiths. Every door they reach maybe locked, each lock maybe different, and new locks will come out every day. Students need the persistence and critical thinking to decode the lock and step through to new knowledge.
(Again I apologize for the cliche. But hey, I am a teacher. I can only write in already used alliteration, metaphor, and hperbole)
“The choice of technology as a teaching tool is no longer mine to make. My choice is how best to use it. Look around! Computers are everywhere.”
“These kids need to be educated for their world not ours. In their world Technology may be as ubiquitous as doors are.”
As I said in my tweet, if a student walked into your classroom with the skills and knowledge far above what you planned to teach, would you ignore the knowledge? the skills? the child? Let’s quit talking about the elephant in the room and let’s embrace it!
Thank YOU! Thank YOU!
This is without question one of the most frustrating aspects of teaching. It seems tempting to simply say that the problem will disappear, or maybe lessen when the people who become teachers will be of the generation where computers are doors. But then I think that the teachers who are resistant to technology were once these young teachers. So the cycle continues. Why does the education system seem to lag so far behind? What is it about the SYSTEM that discourages or waylays change?
I agree that computers will be everywhere, however I am not sure we know the impact. TVs are everywhere, is it educators number one job to teach children how to use TV? Radio is everywhere, is it educators number one job to teach kids to use radio?
Some kids watch MTV some kids watch PBS, some kids listen to top 40, some kids listen to NPR.
Computers are great, but the huge growth in technology use has been driven by the need to socialize. It is slightly different socialization than F2F but still socialization. Is it teachers number one job to teach kids how to socialize? IMHO I learned a lot more about computers and thinking using an Atari running logo than many kids are learning using cutting edge software.
What is exactly the content/skills that the web 2.0 world needs? When I look at the ISTE’s it seems like these are the same ideas good teachers have been focusing on for decades: projects, higher level thinking, creating, sharing, evaluating information.
Sure, computers give more people the tools to create and share and the first few bloggers, vloggers, podcasters really made an impact. Now that everyone is a blogger what will the impact of Web 2.0 be on the world? Remember the first powerpoint project you assigned students? It was exciting, now its dull.
As we embrace technology in education (and I believe we should) we must work hard to separate the glimmer from the gold, or else we will look like zealots.
In education theory the media effect has yet to be proven.
Very compelling post. Today’s students expect technology. It is a tool that they use in their daily life. Technology is second nature to them.
Teaching students without using tech tools does not prepare them for the world at large. No matter the platform or the type of tech tool, integrating technology seamlessly into lessons can only benefit the learner (and the teacher, for that matter). Teachers can no longer use technology for the sake of using technology. They must incorporate it into their lessons as a tool. Those who are resistant…let them go back to teaching with slates and chalk. (said tounge-in-cheek)
With proper spelling, this time:
Very compelling post. Today’s students expect technology. It is a tool that they use in their daily life. Technology is second nature to them.
Teaching students without using tech tools does not prepare them for the world at large. No matter the platform or the type of tech tool, integrating technology seamlessly into lessons can only benefit the learner (and the teacher, for that matter). Teachers can no longer use technology for the sake of using technology. They must incorporate it into their lessons as a tool. Those who are resistant…let them go back to teaching with slates and chalk. (said tongue-in-cheek)
I liked your “doors” analogy. I tell the students not to be closing any doors at their age – no one knows what skills will be needed in the future. Another teacher referred to the “door to knowledge” and the “door to wonder”.
Great post again! I am somewhat confused about where I should begin because so many thoughts come to mind. First of all, Colin’s comment about the radio and TV does not equate to technology. We are not here to teach how to use technology but, rather, use technology to learn. We certainly used radio and TV to learn!
Having been in teaching and technology for 30 years, I am always amazed that people view technology as new. The same problem existed in the early 80’s when people wanted to hang on to their typewriters as opposed to using computers for word processing. We must use this technology because it is plain and simple a better, faster way of doing many things.
Way back when, it was thought that technology would allow us all to cut back on our work week–maybe to 30 hours or less. Technology failed miserably in that respect! However, it succeeded in allowing us to do so much more that we think people are lucky if they “only” have a 40 hour work week.
Unfortunately, I still know math teachers who will not allow the use of calculators in this day and age. All I know is that the teachers who don’t embrace the use of technology will one day wonder why they are being replaced.
I liked the fact that you stated that technology does not have to be used in every lesson and it is not the answer to everything. Technology is definitely here to stay and as teachers we have to understand it and use it to enrich the learning of our students.
“The doors we open and close each day decide the lives we live.”
What an insightful post! I’m far from being an expert on technology but I’ve been learning a lot thanks to my PLN. I’ve been using technology to add variety to my classes of English for a year now and I’ve found out lots of advantages. Among these, it contributes a great deal to learners’ autonomy.
Marisa
I like that “doors” is both an analogy for ubiquitous technology, but also for what technology is in its nature: a portal to someplace new.
Great post Tom, thank you!
So true! I was just having a conversation this weekend with a relative who doesn’t understand the need for a mobile phone. He said, “I lived 58 years without one, there is no reason for one. They are unnecessary and frivolous.”
Now, I agree it might not be a basic necessity for life, like shelter, air, food and water, but 150 years ago indoor bathrooms were considered a luxury. In the first half of the 20th century TVs and even a house telephone were considered luxuries in many places, yet it is rare that you enter a home today and NOT see those items, unless you’re Amish (and even they ascribe to some technological advances!).
At what point does technology morph into something seen as frivolous and a luxury into something we cannot live without? Sure, my parents raised me without the luxury of cell phones, but in today’s world, as a busy parent, student and pre-service teacher, I cannot imagine being separated from my cell phone.
And I suppose I should note that my daughter knows how to use all the features of our phones better than my husband or I!
First of all, I respect your ability to clearly articulate the need for change amongst educators. Though we have had technologies impact our lives in multiple ways for generations, we always have a tendency to resist the new thing, whatever it is. The problem with educators still resisting computers being used in the classrooms, is that computers are not a new technology. In fact they are becoming an old technology like the refrigerator, TV, radio, etc. that you talk about. For educators not to use the powerful learning tools to help students learn is not only an injustice to our kids, it is an injustice to our country. We are not preparing students for the world they will live in and it is scary to think what will happen to our country if we don’t quickly transform our educational system and provide all learners with the needed tools to be successful in today and more importantly tomorrow’s world.
Secondly, I respect your commitment to fight the good fight in helping transform our schools. You are a educational leader that all educators can learn from. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us.
Thanks! I have never known a time when I was embracing and adapting to new technology. That is something people don’t think about us.
WE have lived with nothing but change, and I agree there is every reason to focus on how best to use technology, not whether to use it.
I favor free to low cost technology that is not part of a corporate package. Thank you very much.
Ooops! “…I have never known a time when I was [NOT] embracing and adapting to new technology.
“Why do we have educators resistant to something that will continue to grow and improve the way we access, analyze, consume and communicate information?”
When folks started selling refrigerators they didn’t market the door. When people tried to get washing machines into homes they didn’t market the door. When people tried to market cars they didn’t market the door. Educators trying to sell technology are marketing the doors.
“Why are we not using that power to promote creative thought?”
Because we are marketing the door, and not the creative thoughts behind the door. Real learning takes place behind the doors. Yes we have to walk through them, but without knowing what is behind them, many will never take a peek.
We have hit a point with technology in education that is the equivalent of trying to inspire artists by showing them new brushes. Kind of like trying to convince someone to go sailing by showing them a boat. Show them the beauty of the ocean instead.
Tom
Status quo controllers resist change discussed above for it ads solvent to their requisites for a linear network. We as nodes are building new community through the glue of PLNs and that further disturbs the status quo. It is disruptive, for some.
Gatekeepers give lip service to electoral demands by providing “hardware”(in our case #DERNSW) but bureaucracies ultimately are slowing the dismantling of their current function by doing so. Altruistic learning improvement? I. Don’t. Think. So.
My favourite tech immersion metaphor remains “When the fish no longer see the water, you know we have arrived.”
[…] Doors Doors? […]
Why do you use a door? What is its purpose?
Teachers, world wide, are at different stages of this change in regard to the adoption and embedding of new technologies into their teaching and learning.
Teachers, world wide, have been taught in different institutions-passing through many different doors to each other. The lecturers in these universities are at various different stages in their encouragement of the use of new technologies.
Every teacher has had a different history, different experiences, different availability of hardware and software, different training opportunities…not all have had the opportunity to be exposed to the benefits of certain technologies.
Change does not happen overnight. Fullan states”There are seven stages of change.” Some teachers have not yet been enlightened (Stage 1-awareness) to the creative abilities of new technologies.
Those teachers have no reason to open certain doors if they are happy where they are.
They do not want to go out of their comfort zone into another area-through the door, if there is no worthwhile reason for them to go somewhere different.
The door is heavy. It protects me from the inclement weather. But, I have to open the door to leave. I have to open the door wide at times to get large items inside. I can open the door a little to see who is outside.
Technology can do the same. For me, technology is the door. If I open the door wide, I can see and do much more than if I just open it a little bit. Sometimes I prop the door open. Sometimes I put a door stop to keep the door closed. It’s the use that determines the effect or impact.
Today, I’ll open the door wide.
I think this is the first time I’ve read one of your blogs. I loved it. I guess I’ll be reading more. Some people just have a way with words that make others think. Thanks for opening the ‘door’ of my mind!
One of your commentors said “Students need the persistence and critical thinking to decode the lock and step through to new knowledge.”
I totally agree with that. I don’t think we need to be “teaching technology” but showing students how to increase their persistance, resilience, and support their inquisitiveness. We need to teach them how to ‘work smart’ through technology. We should not be afraid that students know more about technology than we do, we should honor that by allowing them to use it for their end products.
Like The Doors, You Light My Fire. (even though I am definitely not a pre-service teacher)
I am so glad that you are clicking these new teachers into the power of social media. It is an essential 21st Century literacy.
I liked what you said about it not being our choice as to whether to integrate technology in the classroom.
As Will Richardson has blogged, “when are we going to saddle this horse and ride it?”
While the teachers who have said, “What will happen when the calculators are broken?” have good intentions, they are the modern day, “What happens if they have to write a paragraph on the ACT?” I think they mean well– they want students to succeed the way THEY know how, the way THEY did it. You are very insightful in recognizing that, while you may be fine and adjusted to the world just fine, you must plan for your students’ futures.
[…] As I tweeted to @tomwhitby “we are the last generation to which technology is an option” which stimulated an intellectual twitter exchange and his ‘Doors’ blog post […]
Great post Tom, and don’t worry about running out of ideas. They will come, I’m sure…
@Colin Matheson: “Is it teachers number one job to teach kids how to socialize?” Well actually I think it is. This is what I thought, really, that school isn’t there just to teach Maths and English but to teach children how to become a social being able to interact, live with others, tolerate them.
Tom,
It was your first response to one of my novice tweets that led me to open my PLN Door – Educator’s PLN.
Thank you!
[…] fact that kids need to be taught how to use technology. To them, technology will be as common as doors. Read Tom’s post. It is really well written. He is on twitter. Steve Anderson wrote about a […]