BLOG 3: Reflection of NET Draft 2010

The goals proposed in the NET Draft are from the Obama administration: to raise the number of college graduates and prepare "all high school graduates ready to succeed in college and careers" (U.S. Department of Education, p.2). To summarize it, we must be innovative and strategic to achieve these aggresive goals and their challenges.

Learning directives state that "we focus what and how we teach to match what people need to know, how they learn" (p.vi) State of the art technology allows us to personalize learning to fit each one's needs by differentiation, individualization, and personalization. It will allow them to "take ownership of their learning" (p. 12).

To make future connections, competencies such as critical thinking and complex problem solving must be integrated into the curriculum (p.10). Assessment helps us measure the things that matter---in order that we might find the strengths and weaknesses in our teaching and learning and use that data for "continuous improvement" (p.35). In order that we move past our traditional role of teaching, there must be an infrastructure that provides for staff training (p.ix).

The NETP learning goals are that we revese standards to "reflect 21st century expertise" and adopt the technology resources that would support it. Teaching goals include developing online communities for educators, technology training for pre-service and in-service educators, and to use the technology to obtain the best resources (p.xiii).

An issue I see as a current concern in the draft plan is regarding the challenges and problems--we don't have the funds for the research and development needed to address them. Th ue examples of "on-demand learning," while very exciting, all require funding for the initial set up, but also the funding of training for the staff.

Another issue that tends to get in the way of these goals is the potential of Universal Design. It sounds great! Universal online texts, assessments, and standards will do a great job of "leveling the playing field," as they state on page 32, but one controversy I foresee would be the conflict between state and federal standards. At what point is a state allowed to be its own entity versus a "universal" system.

The Principles of Connected Teaching, page 40, sound quite exciting but "futuristic." It seems so far away, yet we know that technology increases faster than we can imagine. It definitely leaves a tough problem for us, as educators, to catch up!





U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf.