My engagement with technology has always been a reluctant one. I've avoided friends' pleas to create a facebook and only signed up for skype a couple of weeks ago. The idea that as a teacher I would be expected to engage my students' learning through technology is daunting. Not only do i feel ill-equipped to do this, but I'm also a little suspicious of the idea that technology really illuminates and adds dimension to learning for students.
As a student, my high school had pretty limited resources. Near the end of my high school education, the school bought a single projector and teachers vied for use of it among them. I don't necessarily feel that my high school education was the best that it could have been, but I'm not sure I think that the addition of technology would have made it more compelling. I really feel that if I had had better instructors, regardless of their use of technology, my experience would have had more intellectual depth.
One may argue that better teachers would have used more technological resources. Wen I think about past students as products of education, though, and this may be due to my bias toward traditionalism, I think that students before this explosion of technology not only were smarter but may have actually learned better. I'm not sure if this is just a misconception that I have or if it has some real grounding.
The proof for this idea in my mind though, is that the types of written works that were created for public consumption in the 1700s for example, are at a much higher intellectual level than works created for today's public. People in the 1700s engaged significantly more complex language and ideas in the public sphere than non-academics do today. This means that students would have had to learn at more complex levels if they were to be part of public, never mind academic, discourse. And they definitely did this without the aid of technology. I don't think students today could comprehend and critique the same works that students in the 1700s had and would technology help them do it?
I guess what I'm trying to say is, how will technology improve my students' intellect in the long term in ways that traditional teaching would not? How will technology make my students smarter? Technology may engage students' interest more, and it may make them more excited about the tasks at hand, but will it change their intellectual trajectory? I'm hoping that this course will help answer some of these questions for me and clarify ideas about the usefulness of technology in creating intellectual character.
As a student, my high school had pretty limited resources. Near the end of my high school education, the school bought a single projector and teachers vied for use of it among them. I don't necessarily feel that my high school education was the best that it could have been, but I'm not sure I think that the addition of technology would have made it more compelling. I really feel that if I had had better instructors, regardless of their use of technology, my experience would have had more intellectual depth.
One may argue that better teachers would have used more technological resources. Wen I think about past students as products of education, though, and this may be due to my bias toward traditionalism, I think that students before this explosion of technology not only were smarter but may have actually learned better. I'm not sure if this is just a misconception that I have or if it has some real grounding.
The proof for this idea in my mind though, is that the types of written works that were created for public consumption in the 1700s for example, are at a much higher intellectual level than works created for today's public. People in the 1700s engaged significantly more complex language and ideas in the public sphere than non-academics do today. This means that students would have had to learn at more complex levels if they were to be part of public, never mind academic, discourse. And they definitely did this without the aid of technology. I don't think students today could comprehend and critique the same works that students in the 1700s had and would technology help them do it?
I guess what I'm trying to say is, how will technology improve my students' intellect in the long term in ways that traditional teaching would not? How will technology make my students smarter? Technology may engage students' interest more, and it may make them more excited about the tasks at hand, but will it change their intellectual trajectory? I'm hoping that this course will help answer some of these questions for me and clarify ideas about the usefulness of technology in creating intellectual character.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRayhan, I think your question, "how will technology improve my students' intellect in the long term in ways that traditional teaching would not?" is really important. As a student and as an educator we need good reasons for why and how we teach. The learning of our students depends on it. I don't know what the best method is for teaching, but I do know this, it's circumstantial. What worked for students in the 1700s may not work for students today. What worked for me as a student may not work for my students. And this changes not only generationally, but from school to school, from one environment to another.
ReplyDeleteSo allow me to follow your question with another. "What is more important, teaching your students to learn the way you think they should learn, or teaching them to learn in a manner which is easy and accessible to them?"
I too prefer more traditional methods, but not all students respond to such strategies. So will I use technology in my classroom? If it works I'll use it. As a teacher I believe it is my duty to employ every tactic I can to aid in my students' understanding. And if that means using technology, so be it.
I've been thinking about your question a lot Bekah. Definitely once you asked it, but also generally when thinking about the different readings we've been doing and the program.
DeleteI think that your questions poses the two things: easy and accessible and the way I think students should learn as opposite or at least different. In a way this is true, but in a way it isn't. I do think that there are methods of instruction that improve learning and methods that don't. Some of those that improve learning will make material easier and more accessible and some won't. While I do think that motivation is important to student learning, it shouldn't be the be-all end-all of my goals as an educator. So yes sometimes, when my goal is to get them more motivated, I may utilize learning tools that are easier and/or more accessible, but other times I would not. Yes I want my students to want to learn, but that's not all I want from them. There is value in things being hard and I need my students to learn that too.
So I guess my answer would be that I want them to learn in the manner that best promotes learning, regardless of what I want and also regardless of what they want. Maybe this is too harsh? Maybe it's impractical? I don't know ... What do you think? ... I really appreciate your thoughts on this
Rayhan! I find your view about students’ intelligence prior to technology interesting. For some reason my mind reflects back on students not being able to tie their shoes because they are so used to the Velcro closure. Now I know that Velcro is not necessarily a technological impact. But through “advances” students do not know how to tie their shoes! And I am not just talking about little kids either! Another thing that comes to mind is the diminishment of cursive handwriting or writing in general for that matter. Students do not have to write much because they text, tweet, facebook, etc. They are no longer writing in cursive and they are barely doing writing that is not cursive. In addition, with the feature of spell check on computers and cell phones, students do not have to know how to spell. Just use spell check. But even with these changes or losses, I do not think that technology has necessarily impacted student’s intelligence per say – when used appropriately. Technology doesn’t necessarily increase intelligence when used in the schools. It is just a different way of representing learning materials or providing instruction. Another way to get students engaged since they are consumers of technology. With the growing importance of technology, students need exposure to this area as a life skill. I will admit some aspects of technology can be debilitating when used as a crutch – that is why I said when used “appropriately”.
ReplyDeleteLakeza ... I feel like your posts keep pushing my thinking!! It may seem silly but I never thought about how important it would be to teach my students how to use technology in the first place ... I guess because I was thinking that my students would probably be more proficient than I was in using tech tools, they wouldn't need me to teach them. But you're right, being able to use tech effectively is a serious skill that's highly valued in our society. What's likely the case is that my students may be extremely proficient in using technology generally, but not necessarily in using it effectively. With respect to that, I think it would be really important to use tech in my classes. I do think though, that in many classrooms now tech is used more as a crutch than it is as an effective tool to learning ... that's where my concerns are coming from ... but thanks for offering a change in perspective!
Delete