Literature Review: The Importance of Still Teaching the iGeneration:
New Technologies and
The Centrality of Pedagogy.
Class objectives met through this review: #1 - Demonstrate
the understanding of how technologies can effectively promote student learning;
#8 - Evaluate, adapt and reflect upon
emerging tools and trends by participating in local and global learning
communities and by reviewing current research and professional literature.
Years
of educational floundering and falling test scores prompt people in educational
leadership to find new ways to improve the nation’s schools. One of the latest
trends is an attempt to simply place technology in the hands of students. An, “If
you build it, they will come,” approach. In more than one school district, I
Pads were supposed to be the wave that would propel the best and brightest into
the 21st century. It took the students two days to hack the school’s
firewall and replace the operating system in the school machines. Intellect and resourcefulness are not the issue. Clearly,
it will take more than just dropping of the latest gadgets by the truckload. The
need for guidance and leadership is clear. Educators stand at a crossroad and
need to embrace technology if they are to guide the “iGeneration”.
The authors
of this article go into great length about the pitfalls of technology without
purpose as well as the importance of pedagogy in educational philosophy
nationally. Is education more than simply a set of skills? Certainly, it is a
set of skills in context that define education. The authors quite fully and
craftily defy the notion that solid fundamental teaching can be replaced by a
machine. Mr. J Young is sighted (author
of “A tech-happy professor reboots after hearing his teaching advice isn’t
working”), in support. ‘“Connection’ and
‘community’ among teachers and students seed the essential attributes of ‘curiosity’
and ‘a sense of amazing possibilities’ in learners”’ (Harvard, 314). It is
noted in the research, that although there is initial warmth and excitement
regarding newly introduced technology, it does not hold because it lacks
context (Harvard, 309). It is the relationship provided by the teacher that is
an essential part of the equation.
Technology has a definite place in
the classroom of today and the future, but is it a Procrustean bed?
Another danger that the authors of the study bring to light is the true heterogeneity
of students (Harvard 308). Within the student body, there will be those who
gravitate toward any new technology as a means of power or status. Not all
students will have the same electronic drive or mastery. After all, there is a
societal hierarchy regarding possession of the latest and greatest. Within that
same group, exists a multitude of individuals whose desires venture in realms
other than technology. Educators have a responsibility to these students as
well. Should technology be the only tool? The video, The child-driven education, (sic) hosted by Sugata
Mitra presents an interesting example.
His experiments in the downtrodden areas of Indian cities titled, “Hole in the
Wall,” where he provides internet access to the most needy. Wondrous examples
of learning are revealed where children of destitute poverty magically teach
themselves. Truly it is amazing to witness. One part of the video that is
absent is the numbers of students. Why are there not more? Could it be that not
all are equally drawn to the light of the screen? Could it be that while some
are drawn to technology, others learn differently and are pulled in a different
direction? Mitra’s work is wonderful, but is it wonderful for all students?
Educators need to frame technology and other assets to the benefits of all.
Online education can help bridge the gap for many students and help to
create opportunity regardless of geography. However, it cannot give a student
drive where none exists. It also cannot always give effective feedback. I asked some students today if they would be
comfortable with a grading program that graded their papers. “No,” was the
overwhelming response with many of my students. When I asked why, they replied,
“I like when you give comments,” or “a computer wouldn’t know what I mean.”
These off hand interviews support the research from above; talking and
interacting are keys to education. New Hampshire has an excellent model that
further demonstrates this point. It is called VLACS
(Virtual Learning Academy Charter School). The most recent review of VLACS
online seems quite favorable at first glance.
Test scores are above the state average and students demonstrate competency with consistency. Intrigued, I spoke with a colleague who works closely with some students that use VLACS for credit recovery about the data in the report. He assured me that the program works well for some students. It is often difficult for those seeking credit recovery. Why? In his assessment, it was due to a lack of a relationship or connection. It makes sense. Even Mitra incorporated the idea of a “granny cloud”. The relationship holds true to give the education context.
While
technology has a power and allure that some embrace, we must remember to ask
ourselves what is the aim of that technology? It needs to go beyond the gadget
factor if it is to produce real and insightful change. Teachers should not lose
sight of this fact, or the role of teachers in education. Noted science fiction writer, Arthur C.
Clarke, appeared it the aforementioned video expressing, “If a teacher can be
replaced by a machine, he should be.” Well, if true interaction, context, and
meaningful relationships can be provided by a machine, I will proudly power down.
This
article reaffirmed the role my role in the classroom. Implementation of
technology is important to the future of those I serve. Since beginning this
course, I have tried at least one new technology each week with some of my
classes. So far it has been a wonderful experience because it is an extension
of what we are doing in class. It has pushed my own personal experience down
new pathways. If the above review sounds
somewhat impersonal, I am sorry. I hope to develop a more personal voice as I
become more acquainted with blogging. I look forward to any feedback.
Sincerely,
Joe
Oh Yes! If you made it this far, I have the Harvard Educational Review article printed out, but the disclaimer on the bottom says not to attach it. I am also not sure how to make a link since it when I tried, it just brings me to EBSCO. Any help would further my knowledge and take me further down my EDventure path.
I think that there are many observation in this article that make great points. Technology is good in many ways, but one of the problems is some kids do learn differently. So as a teacher we must identify those students who may need more step by step instructions or by the numbers. As for many kids in many other Countries that may be poor and not have the technology that many industrial Nations have those children tend to grasp the concept. Reason is its something new and they get to see the world and experience what education and the world have to offer. Where as many kids in America are used to having free reign on what they can and cannot do. Many of those kids or at least some kids want to circumvent the system and go places on the net they shouldn't. I would say many kids in urban areas would love to be able to learn on computers, but many school districts don't have the money. So I think this is a pressing issue for many and we as a society within the education stand point must make every effort to educated these young mines with technology and some of the old ways of teaching. We will end up with more rounded students.
ReplyDelete