![\"\"](\"https:\/\/weblearning.co.za\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/04\/potholes-1-300x263.png\")
<\/p>\nComputer literacy training, employing experts and certification are three potholes on the info-bahn that might damage your\u00a0 institutions attempts to effectively use ICT (information and communications technology).<\/p>\n
Goveia and Soule’s article <\/a> argues that if we are to foster ongoing and sustainable use of learning technologies in schools, there are three common \u201cpotholes\u201d that we need to watch out for, as these indentions could keep teachers at an operational level in their journey along the info-bahn.<\/p>\n Training will not launch educators onto the road towards ICT confidence and competency. An expert might know about the finer points of computing, and might inspire staff to use ICT, but a guru’s knowledge in IT is most valuable when it is applied.\u00a0 Experience is best demonstrated, and certification does not indicate ongoing competency.<\/p>\n Training, experts and certificates, the three aforementioned \u201cpotholes\u201d, may be services within your professional development programme. But in the long term, these potholes lead towards dependency and will not\u00a0 encourage agency or a DIY approach amongst teachers and let them take ownership of their own ICT development. If we are going to encourage teachers to adopt, appropriate and innovate with ICT, we need to think about ways that teachers can take themselves beyond entry-level ICT use, and sustain their own educational ICT development.<\/p>\n Further Reading<\/p>\n Computer literacy training, employing experts and certification are three potholes on the info-bahn that might damage your\u00a0 institutions attempts to effectively use ICT (information and communications technology). Goveia and Soule’s article argues that if we are to foster ongoing and sustainable use of learning technologies in schools, there are three common \u201cpotholes\u201d that we need … <\/p>\n\n
\nOur focus needs to be on our own teaching processes, and enquire if \/ how the available technology can enable \/ enhance our own practices. Educators need to understand what kind of teaching approach that they want and\/or how they might use the technology to foster this kind of teaching and learning activities.<\/li>\n
\nGood and experienced educators should be able to recognize tools that will contribute positively to their professional and classroom practice. Apply class use cases, find YouTube\u00a0 examples and let the expert’s do the modelling. Watching them apply their knowledge is probably more satisfying than listening to an expert telling a passive audience about the potential of a tool or how they might apply the technology in a set of circumstances. If an expert is required, then pre-warn them with scenarios, which they could address. Let the \u201cexpert\u201d demonstrate appropriate uses of technology. Better still is to give educators themselves an opportunity to experiment and design teaching and learning activities for challenges they are facing.<\/li>\n
\nBecoming capable with new technologies and applying them to your class is a\u00a0 lifelong endeavor. Certification verifies that a particular skill or skill set was obtained at a particular time. It does not illustrate how the skill was used to promote learning. Neither does it prepare you for the next update or replacement tech. If you want to identify your competency to others, then I think that an educator\u2019s portfolio is a better demonstration of their experiences in using technology than examining a collection certificates.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n