I've been to a good number of meetings this year (both formal and informal) that involved discussions about the best ways to use technology with children. I really enjoy these conversations, and I'm excited about all the possibilities that the digital domain presents for teachers and students in schools. However, time and again I have heard teachers turn a phrase that disturbs me a bit, and it goes something like this: "Sometimes, I think the kids know more about technology than we do. We should be learning from them!"
Really?
I mean......really????
Okay, there are two ways to look at this, I'll admit that. On the one hand, it is fair to say that the children of this digital generation probably are a bit more acclimated to certain technologies and devices than some adults. If an adult hasn't had a chance to play with a new iPhone and a child has, then the child will have a bit more experience with the device and could therefore be considered to "know more" about iPhones than the adult.
On the other hand, just because a child has played with a device and knows a good number of its apps, that does not automatically mean that the child "knows more" about how to use that device than an adult might. I try to point this out to teachers who make the claim when I'm talking to them. A child who has played with multiple devices, has e-mailed and IMed numerous times, and who has a social networking page is not necessarily better prepared to explore ways to use that technology to create products and respond to the world than his or her teachers.
I often joke, "Just because a kid can tell me about hammers, screwdrivers, and wrenches doesn't mean that I'm going to let him or her try to fix my bathroom or car." Knowledge of a tool does not trump the knowledge of how to use tools to create things. Surfing the web a lot doesn't displace a well-earned Master's degree; having your own webpage doesn't counter a decade of experience in education; and when your first impulse is to "ask Google" or "go to Wikipedia" (two of my students' common solutions), that doesn't hold up against the knowledge about how to evaluate resources and refine research.
Yes, I agree that the children of the modern world know quite a bit about technology. What they do not need are teachers who defer to that limited knowledge and are afraid of knowing less than the kids; instead, they need teachers who are ready to show them how to use those technologies to be a integral part of the world.
Showing posts with label digital literacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label digital literacy. Show all posts
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The Meaning of "Uniform" in School
As the first online homework assignment for my class this year, I had the students read an article about uniforms for public schools. The school uniform debate is always a good conversation starter, and the kids enjoyed responding to the pros and cons of the issue. As you might expect, there was a flurry of "personal expression" arguments. The kids were smart about how they presented their views, though. They understood why one might say that uniforms could improve self-esteem, decrease negative peer interaction, and remove gang and clique cultures from the school. They understood those arguments; they just didn't believe them. They countered (and most research shows) that those anticipated effects really don't take place, and that bullying and grouping and low self-esteem happens with or without uniforms.
And so we wrapped up the debate (leaving a few loose ends), and I moved on through the week. A few days later, though, I realized that I was participating in a different "uniform" debate, and it had nothing to do with what my students were wearing. I found myself in multiple conversations about the school's literacy program and ELA curriculum. I began to notice that the arguments being made in favor of certain methods (and the curriculum at large) were very similar to those used in the dress code debate. I found myself at odds with the notion that there is a way to teach language arts in a uniform manner, conforming to the terminology and processes of a certain method and ensuring that all students have a common experience in class.
I keep trying my best to see the need for this uniformity in curriculum. I know that no district wants to explain why certain teachers won't follow along with a given program. It looks like disrespect and dissent, and it reflects poorly on the district at large. At the same time, I continue to see language arts as an area in flux; the digital age has started a transition that is effecting what language is and how it is used. I believe that there are positive aspects to most programs and methods, but I also believe that a teacher needs to be free to find the best avenues of work with his own students and their specific needs. Beyond that, each teacher develops his or her own teaching style, and not all programs mesh perfectly with all styles.
An acting professor of mine was once discussing the art of acting and creating a character. I asked him which method was "best": the popular Method created by Stanislavsky, or the variation on that theme by Sanford Meisner, or perhaps something else entirely. And his answer still resonates: he told me to immerse myself in all of the various processes, and then to take what was best from each of them to create something personal that worked for me. I now find myself in a similar scenario with the curricula and practices being used in education. Rather than ascribing completely to one method of doing things, I prefer to learn about all the various programs and take from them what's best for me and my students. In effect, it's the "personal expression" argument from a different perspective.
My hope is that this will not look as though I refuse to "buy in" to a given system that the school is supposed to be doing; I don't intend to dismiss any educator's work as wrong or irrelevant. However, I also know that when it comes to actual teaching in the classroom, I will always choose the freedom to experiment, develop, and explore different ways of doing things that will best help my students succeed.
And so we wrapped up the debate (leaving a few loose ends), and I moved on through the week. A few days later, though, I realized that I was participating in a different "uniform" debate, and it had nothing to do with what my students were wearing. I found myself in multiple conversations about the school's literacy program and ELA curriculum. I began to notice that the arguments being made in favor of certain methods (and the curriculum at large) were very similar to those used in the dress code debate. I found myself at odds with the notion that there is a way to teach language arts in a uniform manner, conforming to the terminology and processes of a certain method and ensuring that all students have a common experience in class.
I keep trying my best to see the need for this uniformity in curriculum. I know that no district wants to explain why certain teachers won't follow along with a given program. It looks like disrespect and dissent, and it reflects poorly on the district at large. At the same time, I continue to see language arts as an area in flux; the digital age has started a transition that is effecting what language is and how it is used. I believe that there are positive aspects to most programs and methods, but I also believe that a teacher needs to be free to find the best avenues of work with his own students and their specific needs. Beyond that, each teacher develops his or her own teaching style, and not all programs mesh perfectly with all styles.
An acting professor of mine was once discussing the art of acting and creating a character. I asked him which method was "best": the popular Method created by Stanislavsky, or the variation on that theme by Sanford Meisner, or perhaps something else entirely. And his answer still resonates: he told me to immerse myself in all of the various processes, and then to take what was best from each of them to create something personal that worked for me. I now find myself in a similar scenario with the curricula and practices being used in education. Rather than ascribing completely to one method of doing things, I prefer to learn about all the various programs and take from them what's best for me and my students. In effect, it's the "personal expression" argument from a different perspective.
My hope is that this will not look as though I refuse to "buy in" to a given system that the school is supposed to be doing; I don't intend to dismiss any educator's work as wrong or irrelevant. However, I also know that when it comes to actual teaching in the classroom, I will always choose the freedom to experiment, develop, and explore different ways of doing things that will best help my students succeed.
Monday, August 17, 2009
No Time to Slow Down ... Thank Goodness!
There's nothing like the start of a school year to keep a teacher motivated and working! With only a couple weeks left before I'm working with my sixth graders, I've found that the short timetable is the ultimate incentive for me to keep moving as I plan and create for my class. In the past, I've entered the summer with high goals for setting up ways to integrate technology into the coming school year, but I usually run out of time.
Not this year. The difference is small, but important. This year I have the initial structure of my digital classroom in place, and I have also talked at length about it (on the web, with colleagues, on the bulletin board outside of my classroom). I've found this to be exactly what I've needed; in order to ensure that I see my ideas through to the end, I publicly talk about how exciting my ideas will be. This way, if I don't complete what I endeavor to do, I will have an audience questioning me. By "going public" with my own process, I have added motivation to its completion.
I think that I will apply this lesson to the way that I deal with my students in the fall. Rather than having them simply do their work on my timetable or create their own private goals for completion, I am going to move them toward making their intentions known and public. This will cast a light on the process of their learning instead of constantly focusing on the product that is "required". Everything I've been reading lately encourages this attention to process over product, and this little step of bringing others into my own process has opened my eyes to the possibilities that lie ahead.
Not this year. The difference is small, but important. This year I have the initial structure of my digital classroom in place, and I have also talked at length about it (on the web, with colleagues, on the bulletin board outside of my classroom). I've found this to be exactly what I've needed; in order to ensure that I see my ideas through to the end, I publicly talk about how exciting my ideas will be. This way, if I don't complete what I endeavor to do, I will have an audience questioning me. By "going public" with my own process, I have added motivation to its completion.
I think that I will apply this lesson to the way that I deal with my students in the fall. Rather than having them simply do their work on my timetable or create their own private goals for completion, I am going to move them toward making their intentions known and public. This will cast a light on the process of their learning instead of constantly focusing on the product that is "required". Everything I've been reading lately encourages this attention to process over product, and this little step of bringing others into my own process has opened my eyes to the possibilities that lie ahead.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Zoller45 (a new digital classroom)
I've just added a feed to my new classroom blog (http://Zoller45.blogspot.com). I am looking forward to getting this up and running in the fall with my new sixth grade classroom. We're going to be completely wired, with a classroom blog, Twitter account, and a school-wide wiki. I can 't wait to see how the students react, and how this influences their learning in the coming year. It's time for my classroom to move completely into the Web 2.0 technology that I have been familiar with for some time. It should be awesome!
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
The End of Print Media?
A few nights ago, I was watching the Scholastic Video version of The Paperboy by Dav Pilkey with my two young children. It's a simple story about a boy who wakes up before dawn and pedals through his town delivering papers with his dog tagging along behind him. There is a throw-back sense of romanticism to this tale, and I always connect it to my own time spent as a paperboy when I was a teen (the early mornings, the smell of the papers, the newsprint on my hands). Of course, the story has started to take on a new meaning for me with the recent announcements of newspapers around the country shutting down. In turn, this has started me thinking about print media in general, and what effect the digital domain is having on them.
There are two very distinct sides to the debate. Some argue that print-based media are a necessity in any young person's life, and that moving away from traditional teaching methods is "giving in" to the digital tidal wave and leaving good pedagogy behind. Others point out that all languages have changed over time, and that these digital elements to literacy are just the next step in the evolution of our language and how we learn. It's a tricky topic, because many people are emotionally invested in it. And even though I tend to lean toward the second argument and see a shift toward newer forms of literacy not only as a given, but also a necessity, I often feel a pull toward showing kids the value of "a good book" and trying to share with them that emotional feeling that The Paperboy brings to me.
I don't think anyone believes that there will come a time when no print media of any kind exist, but the times are definitely changing, and the ways that people interact with text is in flux as well. My students are currently doing a research project, and we spoke the other day about how the research would have looked twenty years ago (using a card catalog and strenuous cross-referencing). They indicated that they prefer a world where you can have multiple sources open at once (without taking up an entire table) and can follow links to information as you read. Truth be told, I also prefer this digital world. As much as I fondly remember my experiences in print, I have accomplished so much more in so much less time since I have been able to use digital resources.
A few weeks ago, a second grade teacher in my building approached me to discuss doing a joint class newspaper project. I quickly agreed; having my fifth graders create, print out, and distribute a small class newspaper has been a yearly highlight for me, and combining our efforts with a younger grade sounded like an exciting new direction for the activity. However, the more I thought about setting this project up, the more I realized how dated it has become. I went back to my colleague and said, "What about a wiki instead of a print newspaper?" She immediately agreed, having the same sort epiphany that I had. Together we realized that having students work on a newspaper would be having them work in an increasingly out-of-date medium, and that our efforts would be more practical and helpful if we taught them how to publish their ideas digitally.
Which brings me back to The Paperboy. Yes, there is a certain beauty in the simple idea of a young boy bringing the news to his neighborhood before the first rays of the sun crack the horizon; but having that same little boy digitally publish something of his own that could be read by the world is an equally fascinating notion, and one that will ultimately prove to be a foundation for the world of his (and my children's) future.
There are two very distinct sides to the debate. Some argue that print-based media are a necessity in any young person's life, and that moving away from traditional teaching methods is "giving in" to the digital tidal wave and leaving good pedagogy behind. Others point out that all languages have changed over time, and that these digital elements to literacy are just the next step in the evolution of our language and how we learn. It's a tricky topic, because many people are emotionally invested in it. And even though I tend to lean toward the second argument and see a shift toward newer forms of literacy not only as a given, but also a necessity, I often feel a pull toward showing kids the value of "a good book" and trying to share with them that emotional feeling that The Paperboy brings to me.
I don't think anyone believes that there will come a time when no print media of any kind exist, but the times are definitely changing, and the ways that people interact with text is in flux as well. My students are currently doing a research project, and we spoke the other day about how the research would have looked twenty years ago (using a card catalog and strenuous cross-referencing). They indicated that they prefer a world where you can have multiple sources open at once (without taking up an entire table) and can follow links to information as you read. Truth be told, I also prefer this digital world. As much as I fondly remember my experiences in print, I have accomplished so much more in so much less time since I have been able to use digital resources.
A few weeks ago, a second grade teacher in my building approached me to discuss doing a joint class newspaper project. I quickly agreed; having my fifth graders create, print out, and distribute a small class newspaper has been a yearly highlight for me, and combining our efforts with a younger grade sounded like an exciting new direction for the activity. However, the more I thought about setting this project up, the more I realized how dated it has become. I went back to my colleague and said, "What about a wiki instead of a print newspaper?" She immediately agreed, having the same sort epiphany that I had. Together we realized that having students work on a newspaper would be having them work in an increasingly out-of-date medium, and that our efforts would be more practical and helpful if we taught them how to publish their ideas digitally.
Which brings me back to The Paperboy. Yes, there is a certain beauty in the simple idea of a young boy bringing the news to his neighborhood before the first rays of the sun crack the horizon; but having that same little boy digitally publish something of his own that could be read by the world is an equally fascinating notion, and one that will ultimately prove to be a foundation for the world of his (and my children's) future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
