The term ‘Personalization’ has made the rounds in the educational technology portions of education for sometime now. Usually the education community incorporates terms like this or abandons them, but ‘Personalization’ seems to have been artificially kept alive by #EdTech companies. Teachers demonstrate a consistent resistance to the practice of personalization. It does not seem reasonable so many teachers would resist an advantageous idea, so what else could this strong Personalization Resistance mean?
If the practice of Personalization is too intricate to execute by a single teacher. If #EdTech companies are reluctant to stop pushing for those in education to purchase softwares/apps/programs which Personalize for us
The more personalized the environment, the more work for each teacher.
True or False?
True, that if every student requires unique learning structures the work has potentially increased anywhere from 25 to 130 times.
False, the work is just redistributed to a front-loaded model. You could expect that some of the learning structures you prepare for use by more than one student. That work can likely be used for following years as well.
True, technology alone cannot create/recover time in which teachers create and/or vet content.
False, technology can increase the speed of creation and delivery of content.
Teachers do not automatically have the skills and attitudes of digital content creation/vetting naturally. So, true, time is required to upgrade to this skill set. Not that many teachers are not able to do so, but those are not cultivated elements of teacher preparation or on-the-job professional development.
Development of content by individual teachers would result in further personalization for their students. False, in the sense that a personalized curriculum may actually save teaching time.