Early in March I used the word ‘trepidation’. I still feel the same. I am not giving myself the time I need to truly engage with the course material. I need to allocate large chunks of time to go through the material, and this is difficult on a screen that is a distraction given it is linked to the world. Perhaps my husband’s suggestion to replace my lumbering slow PC tower with a laptop isn’t the worst idea in the world. I could then move away from my desk, turn off the wi fi and not to have print off a tree. (Who am I kidding? I have my iPad for that!) I find that I cannot concentrate if I stay at my desk for endless hours. I still take notes by hand though, and believe the physical act of putting pen to paper allows to me to retain and comprehend much of my reading.
The followingblogposts allowed me to synthesise my thinking from the module readings, and it’s interesting to see the common thread that runs through my writing: the gap between reality and academia. I still haven’t settled totally into this higher learning mindset, and I realise that it’s because this course wants us to rethink education in the digital age in a positive way, and I find it hard to reconcile what I see every day in my school, my classroom, my library. Returning to complete my masters gives me hope, to see possibilities, to know that I can make a difference to my students in a small way. I note my posts get more optimistic, using words like ‘will’ instead of ‘should’, which demonstrates my (sub)conscious attempts to move forward with my learning.
I wasn’t sure of the term, Personal Learning Network when I started this course. I thought it meant following some highly regarded digital innovators on twitter and retweeting their tweets to my followers. I understand now that is only one element. A PLN has to involve many more online communities than just twitter and it must, absolutely must, involve me participating and contributing regularly and with careful intent. I learnt this from Module 2.5 ‘Thinking in Networks‘, from reading what was written on the forums, and following the INF530 hashtag on twitter. Clearly I am not as big a contributor as I could be (evidenced by this post). And I am conscious that my other sources of information might inform this lack of interaction. I find I get most of my professional knowledge by subscribing to newsletters from communities such as Scoop.it and Wikispaces, companies like Pearson and Encyclopaedia Britannica, and publishers like Random House and Allen & Unwin. This weekly drop to my inbox gives me a quick source of updated material, but it is, in effect, a one-sided conversation. (Replying in order to win a book doesn’t count, does it?) Twitter is blocked on the school network, so I mine other areas for relevant and interesting content. This system works for me although I do have other ways to contribute to a professional network – the OzTL and Qld TL listserves are extremely active communities and where I can support other TLs.
Apart from Module 2.5, my other two favourites are 1.6 Digital Literacies and 3.1 Open, Social, Participatory media (interestingly, ones that captured others’ attention as well). The readings coalesced my scattered ponderings, and gave meaning to so many of my unstructured philosophies of pedagogy (Downes, 2012). It gave labels to types of learning that I observed or wanted to imagine possible (Siemens, 2008). Beginning this study has dovetailed nicely for me with the introduction of a subject at our school called Research & Tech (R & T) that I teach with the eLearning coordinator. Theoretically she takes the so-called ‘tech’ lessons and I take the research. In actual fact, it hasn’t always worked out like that and it’s been great to be able to apply aspects of this unit to my teaching. I was able to discuss the changing attitudes to Wikipedia with Year 8s, and just last week, the Year 9 classes created their own wiki to curate a range of sources (which they will annotate) to assist them to prepare for their History exam on World War I. Finally, I start to believe in the power of the digital age (#tookmelongenough).
I have always enjoyed writing and felt it was a strength I could bring to an academic life. I love to read other people’s writing especially when it is quirky and clever, so that’s what I aim for in mine. I think I write with passion, but apparently it’s persuasion. I need to learn to write in different ways for different audiences. My hope is that once I complete this subject, I can rethink my style for the next one.
References:
Collaborative Society. (Producer). (2014, 15 May 2014). Howard Rheingold: Network Awareness. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/86182564.
Downes, S. (2012). Essays on meaning and learning networks. National Research Council Canada.
Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. ITFORUM for discussion.
Collaborative learning isn’t new, however, its latest evolution and re-emergence as a driving force for curriculum is linked directly to the impact of the digital age. Embedding of digital collaborative learning in pedagogy is exemplified by participatory platforms which create and share material, and by social bookmarking sites which control and organise information. The growing use of Web 2.0 to deliver content should be responsible for a transformation in the way classrooms look and classes act. Unfortunately, progress to connected, creative communities is not equitable or consistent, and the reasons are as complex and ubiquitous as the web. There are privacy, safety, and ethical concerns for young and vulnerable learners; however there is a growing belief that despite these troubling issues, it is imperative that collaborative learning becomes the norm rather than the exception. Schools must challenge themselves to find their own solutions quickly, because the required institutional transformation seems unlikely.
Collaborative learning primarily takes advantage of Web 2.0 platforms (2012, Hage & Aimeur, 2010), encouraging students to be participatory and inquiry-focussed. It is linked to the principles of Connected Learning (2014), and promotes constructivist theory (2012). It calls for a departure from traditional skills-based teaching to an immersive environment (2014) where learners take responsibility for mapping their own curriculum. It proposes a move from the Internet as only a knowledge reference, to a place where content and comment is generated (Anderson, 2007; Conole, 2012). Blogs, wikis, and video-making software offer a creative outlet, a way to communicate ideas and share opinions. Student engagement is high (Dessoff, 2010) and teacher control is low (Casey & Evans 2011). In the most effective examples, students seamlessly connect their informal learning to their formal education (Downes & Bishop, 2012), suggesting that each influences the other in a positive, significant way. In this collaborative scenario, students confidently select the most appropriate tools to find solutions to authentic tasks. A key element of the participatory culture is the process of learning, in collaboration with those who share similar interests, resulting in deeper learning (Ito & Martin, 2013).
Shelley Wright (2013) talks about changing her teaching to provide a transformative learning experience for her students.
If classroom transformations like Shelley Wright’s are so necessary, so worthwhile, and potentially so easy, why hasn’t it already occurred? There are real and justified concerns (Couros, 2008; Schachter, 2011) for the safety of young people, and given that many social networks introduced into classrooms haven’t been specifically designed for educational purposes (Jimoyiannis, et. al., 2013), it’s no surprise that issues arise. There are many articles (Asselin & Moayeri, 2011; Brooks, 2009; Hage & Aimeur, 2010) that define Web 2.0, and explain why it needs to be embedded, but few can offer solutions to the problems of cyber bullying (2014), negative digital footprints (2014), and questionable ownership of content (Goode, 2010). Researchers do acknowledge the realistic circumstances existing in schools, but policy and bureaucratic procedure, internal curriculum as well as external testing demands, and parental resistance limit the implementation of many transformative classroom experiences.
More problematic are objecting educators who rely on established methods and refuse to up-skill (O’Hanlon, 2009), arguing traditional teaching is superior. Those committed practitioners who do attempt to integrate technology are often frustrated by firewalls, administrative interference, and technologically savvy students who undermine IT systems (Baker, et. al., 2012), not to mention all the societal concerns (2014) beyond the reach of the classroom teacher. These are not new problems, but they are amplified by the impact of the technology. Incremental change hasn’t solved these issues (Conole, 2012); a complete overhaul of the education sector may be necessary (Redecker, et. al., 2011, De Santis). Schools must try to resolve these issues independently, reinforcing Lee’s (2014) claim that there is a evolutionary stage of digital normalisation (see fig. 1), and a school’s position on this line is largely determined by the willingness of school leaders to find constructive solutions and to engage parents in decision-making.
Fig. 1 The evolutionary Stages of schooling. Image by M. Lee (2014), used with permission
Collaborative learning, however, is more than embedding online platforms to generate and share content. While these useful skills provide a more engaging learning experience and develop higher order learning (Heer), they only account for part of the transformation required by classrooms. The web presents many other tools which help enable critical thinking and deep learning. Students can be taught how to use them to organise information (2011), and can learn how to understand the power of social and professional networks (2014). There is a strong shift to encourage students to become curators (2014), and develop their own digital library using tags and categories. Formal tagging using social bookmarking sites such as Diigo (2014), and real-time collaboration through cloud applications such as the Google apps (Duvall, Jaaskelainen, & Pasque, 2012) caters to a growing demand for synchronised access across a range of devices. These organisational terms are familiar to young people, who tag pictures on Facebook and add categories to their Flickr accounts. They sort their favourite tumblers by following and re-blogging. The task of teachers is to harness this prior knowledge and transition it to classroom experiences. Cultural anthropologist Mimi Ito’s presentations (particularly this 30 minute one) show the importance of exploiting these out-of-school experiences to enrich formal learning. Organising information is becoming an imperative, so students can avoid being overwhelmed by the immensity and distractions of the web. Some educational institutions recognise the value of free programs, however, some administrations block access to all sites with instant messaging and other “troubling” features. The other problem associated with these solutions is their changing nature, their rise and demise. Difficulty staying in touch with a bewildering number of programs and applications is another issue for institutions.
In light of the perceived burden on teachers to constantly upgrade technological skills and maintain currency with digital tools, there is a need to re-imagine teachers’ roles. Just last week, the MNC released its annual previews of the upcoming Horizon Reports, which set out educational trends identified as the major innovations for the next 12 months. The two key ‘fast-trend’ features of the report for the K-12 Edition (NMC, 2014) clearly support accelerated adoption of collaborative learning in digital environments. They argue student success is directly linked to teachers who are comfortable working with technology. More teachers need to explore online worlds (2014) and build their own connected, professional networks (2012), so they can understand the importance of these communities to young people, and so better support them. It will also allow them to create better policies (2014) to protect both teachers and students. It is sometimes necessary to state the obvious: teachers who learn how to overcome their own technological insecurities, and who demonstrate and encourage students to connect online in creative and ethical ways, ensure students navigate digital environments with ease and confidence.
Listen to Connie Yowell, the U.S. Programs Director of Education for the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation as she answers the question, ‘Connected learning… what do you see as the primary challenges for it in order to be implemented to have impacts?’ This is her second challenge (the first one was assessment).
Additionally, the Horizon preview report (MNC, 2014) stresses the immediate imperative to shift to a more challenging curriculum, where students are more active as learners, more critical as thinkers, and more creative as producers. All these experiences are clearly enabled by collaborative learning. It is possible to find examples of literature (Asselin & Moayeri, 2011; Moreillon & Hall, 2014; Smith & Dobson, 2011) that describe dynamic classrooms. Through online networks, teachers can see the way classrooms are changing. There are also many examples of programs such as Robotics Competition (2014), the Australian Stock Exchange Game (2014), and the Space Design Challenge (2014), in which students participate in educational experiences that are purposeful and engaging. According to these two trends, the most important priority is to develop learners who solve problems and collaborate with other students independent of teachers. The report also reinforces what educational leaders and researchers stress: The transformation must happen now.
The growth of research (Garcia et al., 2014), news articles (2014), and surveys (“List, post, share: Young Australians’ experience of social media,” 2013) implies that young people’s use of the Internet is largely positive and life-affirming. They are open and honest, yet safe. They are creative and community-minded. They are conscious of their political power and the value of participation. Their connections are global, and yet for the main part, their focus is local. Danah Boyd’s online publicationIt’s Complicated: The social lives of networked teens (2014), shows how teenagers engage online, and convincingly belays pedagogical and parental fears. Its extensive research provides positive information to contradict those who say the Internet is all bad, and all addictive. Active and self-motivated students are successful and contribute to society. Digital environments can be overwhelming, but they can also be places where ideas are exchanged, friendships are formed, and leaders are created. Schools need to learn how to harness this engagement more effectively.
Sonia Livingstone makes a persuasive case about young people and the way they interact online, arguing there isn’t a need to overreact and attempt to restrict their activities.
When we think about schools in the future, it is difficult to imagine them any other way. However, finally, an inevitable momentum is building. Academics have accumulated an array of research that demands a new vision for education. School leaders have started to gain a clear understanding of what the most effective schools look like. Teachers have begun to accept the reimagining of their roles in classrooms. All of these forces are working together to transform classrooms. The next generations need to be creative, adaptable, and connected to be able to solve the critical concerns that approach humanity at an alarming rate. Collaborative learning is evident when students engage meaningfully with authentic experiences. Technology and online communities will act as the tools to allow students to gain a multitude of digital and collaborative skills. We want young people to engage more positively with their learning. We want them to bring what they know and use it in an educational context. We need them to act ethically and appropriately so they become productive contributors to society. And students? They are just waiting to see if we can catch up.
References:
Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education (pp. 64): JISC Technology & Standards Watch.
Asselin, M., & Moayeri, M. (2011). The Particpatory Classroom: Web 2.0 in the Classroom. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 19(2).
Baker, M., Bernard, F. X., & Dumez-Feroc, I. (2012). Integrating Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning into the Classroom: The Anatomy of a Failure. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(2), 161-176.
Blank, G., & Reisdorf, B. C. (2012). The Participatory Web: . Information, Communication and Society, 15(4), 537 – 554.
Casey, G., & Evans, T. (2011). Designing for Learning: Online Social Networks as a Classroom Environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 1-26.
Downes, J. M., & Bishop, P. (2012). Educators engage digital natives and learn from their experiences with technology. Middle School Journal, 43(5), 6 – 15.
Duvall, S., Jaaskelainen, K., & Pasque, P. (2012). Essential Google: curriculum integration and e-portfolio in assessment. Library Media Connection, 30(6), 52-54.
Heer, R. A model of learning objects – based on A Taxonomy ofr learning, teaching, ans assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Retrieved 15 May 2014, from http://www.celt.iastate.edu/teaching/RevisedBlooms1.html.
Goode, L. (2010). Cultural Citizenship: The Internet and digital culture. Citizenship Studies.
Ito, M., & Martin, C. (2013). Connected Learning and the Future of Libraries. Young Adult Library Services, 12(1), 29-32.
Jimoyiannis, A., Tsiotakis, P., Roussinos, D., & Siorenta, A. (2013). Preparing teachers to integrate Web 2.0 in school practice: Toward a framework for pedagogy 2.0. Australiasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2), 248-267.
Lee, M. (2014). Evolutionary stages of schooling image. supplied by email 28 May 2014.
Levin, D. S., & Ben-Jacob, M. G. (1998). Using Collaboration in Support of Distance Learning Webnet 98 World Conference of the WWW, Internet and Intranet Proceedings (pp. 10). Orlando.
List, post, share: Young Australians’ experience of social media. (2013) (pp. 147): Australian Communications and Media Authority.
Moreillon, J., & Hall, R. N. (2014). Digital Advocacy Stories: A Pedagogical Tool for Communicating and Strengthening Library Values. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 55(2), 100-111.
Redecker, C., Leis, M., Leenderte, M., Punie, Y., Gijsbers, G., Krischner, P., . . . Hoogveld, B. (2011). The Future of Learning: Preparing for change (pp. 93). JRC European Commission: Insitiute for Prospective Technological Studies.
Redecker, C., Leis, M., Leenderte, M., Punie, Y., Gijsbers, G., Krischner, P., . . . Hoogveld, B. (2011). The Future of Learning: Preparing for change (pp. 93). JRC European Commission: Insitiute for Prospective Technological Studies.
I am in the process of transition. The antiquated school library system is being upgraded to an online cloud solution. It’s ridiculous to be attempting this mid-term. I am aware. It has resulted in mild chaos for overdues, daily staff loans and keen researching students. It’s cause for trepidation amongst library assistants who are already dealing with change and instability. It means nothing is being catalogued or monitored.
And yet, I am very excited about it.
I am excited because of this course. All the reading of modules, the viewing of TED talks, the flow of forum posts has allowed me greater awareness of the possibilities of a web-based catalogue. I know it’s a simple thing, but being able to access the catalogue anywhere, any time, on any device, is a powerful idea, and one that can be exploited and promoted to great effect.
The students will be more participatory. They will be able to not only manage their own borrowings, but they can upload reviews, rate resources and use the federated search as a one-stop shop for all their research and source materials (oh yes, that’s how behind we are. #nojudging).
The staff will be better serviced. With the ability to send alerts, set up notifications, and publish regular newsletters, there will be greater awareness of new teaching materials. There is the option to create learning objects, and curate (more) OER materials and even a lesson planning module. Library staff need to be seen to be value-adding to classrooms and teacher efficiency, so my hope is that this new system can increase our visibility.
I know the next month won’t be easy. There will be issues with IT to be negotiated, and kinks in the system to straighten. There will be days of confusion and melt-downs. But I remain excited. I love possibilities, challenges and even chaos. Hopefully my optimism will see us through.
I thank all of you for helping me see my way through.
Classrooms today look a lot different from how they did a decade ago. The rise in technology has seen schools respond with initiatives such as 1:1 and BYOD (Lee, 2014), due to the increased use of digital tools. More importantly however, is the need to move classrooms beyond just adopting devices, to redesigning lessons and units to take advantage of web 2.0 tools (Conole, 2012; Beetham & Oliver, 2010). This change to a more collaborative classroom challenges educators to build creative (Jenkins, 2013), connected (Seely Brown, 2000) communities (Rheingold, 2014). It is important that formal learning environments attempt to replicate and build on those skills and literacies that students are developing in their own time (Ito, 2010). We need to engage our young people more deeply so they can be better prepared for the uncertain future. This need becomes more urgent everyday as new technologies continue to saturate children’s lives.
This essay explores the way the participatory web has the potential to reshape classrooms dramatically by:
Providing clear understanding of collaborative learning
Justifying the urgent need to move towards more connected classrooms
Acknowledging challenges and offering solutions
Presenting best practice examples
References:
Beetham, H. and Oliver, M. (2010). ‘The changing practices of knowledge and learning’. In Sharpe, R., Beetham, H., de Freitas, S. (2010). Rethinking Learning for a Digital Age : How Learners are Shaping their Own Experiences. ch.11 (pp.155-170)
Conole, G. (2012). Designing for learning in an open world (Vol. 4). Springer. Available as ebook from CSU library.
Image retrived 05/05/20014, from flickr creative commons
Jenkins, H. Ford, S. and Green, J. (2013). Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. New York: New York University Press.
Seely Brown, J. (2000) Growing Up: Digital: How the Web Changes Work, Education, and the Ways People Learn, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 32:2, 11-20
I have always been a lurker. I am not sure if this is my nature or my nuture. I know I THINK A LOT about what I read on my facebook newsfeed and people’s reviews on Goodreads (my two favourite social networks), I just don’t necessarily share those thoughts.
I’ve been burned a couple times. Once I despaired when someone (an up and coming YA author actually) did some spoiling for a TV show. He chastised me. I know I have been ‘unfriended’ by a couple of people on Goodreads, and I don’t know why. But I do know it’s not my issue. However, it’s hard not to take things personally.
I see kids spilling their guts online and I want to tell them to be careful and cautious. But on the other hand, I envy their nonchalance, their confidence. I recognise the power of participating, and the feeling that comes with connecting to people who ‘get’ me. I encourage students to use the discussion forums and other web 2.0 tools we set up in school settings and it’s interesting to see the way they use these differently to their own social networks. But there is a paradox in how we want them to behave there. We want them to see our tools the way they see their outside-school networks (i.e useful and a way to connect), but we also don’t want them to necessarily behave on them the same way (i.e write silly things or taunt others). It’s confusing.
Professionally over the years, I have watched seemingly innocent posts on the OzTL Net Listserve start dreadful encounters. Accusations fly around, followed by defensive counter-posts followed up by supportive cries for the initial poster, ending with calls for calm. It’s a big thing to put yourself out there. But it’s also important that we do. Online communities can be a rich experience. Just as we encourage our students to think carefully before posting, we should take our own advice. And the rewards are there if we are willing to take the risks.
Connected learning is the best way to argue for an immediate shift in the way classrooms operate. Siemans (2008) makes a strong case in his discussion paper that the integration of technology must be accompanied by a more collaborative and democratic inquiry-based learning process. He also outlines relevant research on the nature of learning, both traditional theories and newer ideologies developed to account for emerging technologies. Connectivism becomes central to the argument that instructional methodology requires a complete re-design. His exploration of ‘metaphors of educators’ (2008, p.15) are enlightening and relevant, all four notions challenging teachers to stop acting as the gatekeeper, the fount of all knowledge (Chase, 2011), and always controlling the structure of the physical classroom (Garcia, 2014). The more choices we give teachers, the better chance they will find a model that suits them, making it more possible for them to participate in connected learning classrooms.
But much has happened in connected learning since 2008. Rapid change in technology demands a similarly rapid response from academics who must cater to the desire for more evaluation and critique of our digital age. The precise terms and authentic situations in two more recent articles (Ito & Martin, 2013; Kumasi, 2014) clearly demonstrated that librarians can use connected learning practices for more than teaching information and digital literacies. They can be applied to the part of the job that is probably my favourite: building a reading culture in schools.
Using reading as their focus, these US librarians (Ito & Martin, 2013; Kumasi, 2014) explain the unique role libraries can play in schools and communities. They make a strong argument that connected learning is most effective when three separate elements in a young person’s life–interest-driven activities, socially networked communities and academic endeavours–are drawn together by stimulating educational lesson design, so that students engage, participate, and make connections with their learning.
However, at its core, connected learning is really all about supporting young people to best use of the technological tools at their digital fingertips (Garcia, 2014), and to not distinguish between what they enjoy and what they are required to do. If they can see how much their social networking can value-add to their classroom learning, they will be better equipped to succeed.
And what of digital literacy? What role does it play in connected learning? It might seem I see connected learning as simple and easily achieved. Of course it is not. Many external factors impact on its success in schools, and an understanding of digital literacy can help explain and explore the complications. Just as the term connected learning has been refined over time, so too has digital literacy (Bawden, 2008). It encompasses many issues : Ethical usage (Siemens, 2008), privacy issues, concerns about cyberbullying, and promoting positive digital footprints are vital considerations for schools trying to negotiate a fully integrated BYOD paradigm.
Teachers who take up the challenge to explicitly teach students about how to best manage their devices, their data and their digital identity, are the ones who understand the real meaning of connected learning and digital literacy.
Bawden, D. (2008). CHAPTER ONE: Origins and Concepts Of Digital Literacy (pp. 17-32): Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Chase, Z., & Laufenberg, D. (2011). Digital Literacies: Embracing the Squishiness of Digital Literacy. Journal Of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(7), 535-537. doi:10.1598/JAAL.54.7.7
Garcia, A. (Ed.). (2014). Teaching in the connected classroom. Irvine, CA.: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
Ito, M., & Martin, C. (2013). Connected Learning and the Future of Libraries. Young Adult Library Services, 12(1), 29-32.
Kumasi, K. (2014). Connected Learning. Teacher Librarian, 43(3), 8-15.
Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. ITFORUM for discussion.
I have selected Memes in digital culture by Limor Shifman (October, 2013) as my choice for the book review assignment.
I wanted something completely unlike anything I have read before, and my interest in young people’s culture and the role that digital social systems play in their self-identity and self-expression meant that this book caught my eye. I use hashtags all the time, mostly to provoke a (humorous?) response from the boys, but am completely clueless as to how they fit into the concept of memes. Do they even? I have a superficial understanding of this type of talk, and am extremely interested in digging deeper into this minefield of ‘shared cultural experience’ (blurb, 2013). #theyaresuchfun #suchanewbie #toldyoutowaitdidn’ti?
I am also curious about how to make such a seemingly frivolous topic relevant to education and the claim (blurb, 2013) that ‘Limor Shifman makes a compelling argument for taking (memes) seriously’ . The types of programs kids use (is snapchat still in favour?) change so rapidly, but the essence of sharing and alerting, mixing and melding remain a constant. I think memes might be one of those constants. I look forward to finding out more.
It’s winging its way over to me via Book Depo, so I am hopeful it will arrive this week.
#toomanytags?
#somuchtoconsider
#oldschoolhardcopy
Shifman, L. (2013). Memes in digital culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.
I am seen as ‘just the reading teacher’, I love that description.
Building and maintaining a strong reading culture in a school remains a critical part of a teacher librarian’s role. It has been my priority for the past five years. I reach out to students through fiction and my knowledge of it has allowed me to build strong partnerships with readers.
But it’s time to focus on other increasingly more complex concerns, like information fluency & ethics, and technological innovation. I want to better understand the concept of connected learners. I will still build working relationships with my students, but on a more academic level.
It occurs to me that this course promotes a much happier (healthier?) perspective on the impact of digital technologies on education than the one I currently have. I tend to lament what doesn’t work rather than celebrate what does. I note those teachers who reject the paradigm shift, instead of those who embrace it. I have more contact with those students who can’t manage the myriad of expectations, than those who competantly and efficiently balance their digital load.
Being more positive is good. Reading fewer YA books won’t kill me. Consciously working at being aware of the ways technology can improve learning, though – that’s the key.
I want to turn the lock, and open that door. #cutesyanalogies #toomuch? #thereisareasonforthesehashtags #waitforit
Photograph taken by PJ Buckley with student’s permission.
One of my personal and professional observations of the digital age is that most schools are trying to incorporate technology, but some are doing it better than others. The primary factor that determines this is financial, but to a lesser degree, State Governments, willingness of staff and the type of school leadership also play significant roles.
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-AU
X-NONE
X-NONE
In my school some staff are wholly committed, most are trying (yet are feeling overwhelmed), and a small minority remain unconvinced. One eLearning coordinator, three heads of Teaching & Learning, and a small but dedicated group of IT specialists herd this disparate group. It’s already been five-year journey, with no end in sight, but that is expected, it’s an evolving, long-term, strategic plan.
Digital technology affects all institutions. Issues of equity (Harris, 2012), questions about censorship and copyright*, concerns about privacy (Marsoof, 2011) — all are important, but something even more mundane continues to be one of the biggest obstacles: Do schools have the underlying infrastructure to offer teachers genuine student engagement?
We are a 1:1 iPad school. Every day my library staff grapple with all sorts of very real issues, including merging Apple devices with existing PC technology. I have returned to complete this MEd. to gain
the confidence to engage with those who make the decisions about technology within the school in a meaningful way. Currently they view me as the ‘reading teacher’, but as an information specialist, and keen digital innovator, I have a lot more to offer.
The module on digital literacy interests me the most. Connecting with students is my prime objective. I challenge myself to provide all students with consistent and relevant information, so they have the best opportunity to learn. Getting through to them is the key. I have employed a number of social networks (here, here,here, and here) over the years, with varying degrees of success. How can I keep my library in their minds? I am pushing the notion that the library is a virtual space as well as a geographical one. I am pushing myself into classrooms to talk about research and technology. And I want to be better at pushing my skills to administrators and the wider community.
ASLA. (2013). Future learning and school libraries (pp. 23). Canberra ACT: Australian school library association.
Downes, J. M., & Bishop, P. (2012). Educators engage digital natives and learn from their experiences with technology. Middle School Journal, 43(5), 6 – 15.
Harris, C. (2012). Going Mobile. School Library Journal, 58(1), 14.
Marsoof, A. (2011). Online Social Networking and the Right to Privacy: The Conflicting Rights of Privacy and Expression. International Journal Of Law & Information Technology, 19(2), 110-132.
Photograph: Padua Library, taken by P J Buckley, image of student used with permission
* I am frustrated by my inability to find any current, relevant academic papers on this topic. Maybe it means it’s not an issue (ps I don’t believe that). Maybe I used the wrong keywords (pfft). Maybe there just aren’t any yet (could someone get on to that? Thanks).
It is near impossible to disagree with anything stated or argued through Modules 1.1. to 1.5. It’s clear what challenges educators face. It’s obvious the way life has changed because of technology, and the call for schools to adapt is important and necessary. But calls for change isn’t new. For the entire time I have been teaching (since 1986), various stakeholders have denounced the industrial model, and clamoured for something more: More skills-based, more critical, more inquiring, more creative.
Of course technology is impacting on schools, and sometimes, I fear for the worst. I notice that I am unable to concentrate on extended pieces of text, and the way it’s so easy to skim, bookmark and tweet, instead of delving, analysing and pondering. So how hard must it be for students? I struggle everyday with students who can’t focus on instruction, who don’t bother to read emails, and who are more interested in consuming (technology) than being participatory (Brown, 2012).
They want easy, instant connections. They expect individual assistance and regard classrooms as relaxation rooms. They don’t understand or accept the notion of intellectual property (Leech, 2006) and they believe the web is their personal toy box. It’s often frustrating to deal with them.
But it’s also dismissive of me to group all young adults into this somewhat narrow and predominantly negative mindset (Stoerger, 2009). In the classroom, and in my library, I try to treat each student as if they have the skills they need. To remind myself they just need guidance on how and when to use them. And when I do encounter that boy who openly admits his hatred of technology, I must confess to being shocked and a little disappointed. How fair on him is that?
We all grapple with our (different) realities, so we must celebrate the triumphs, the ah-ha moments, the times when student learning makes our day. Because soon enough, there will be another obstacle. That’s when our learning occurs. When our passions are stirred. When our connections are made. We pass these learnings, these passions, these connections onto our students and the cycle continues.
Brown, J. S. (Writer) & J. S. Brown (Director). (2012). The Global One Room Schoolhouse. YouTube.
Leech, R. (2006). Internet ethics: Morality for an online world. Available from CSU Infomit Retrieved 15/03/2014
Stoerger, S. (2009). The digital melting pot: Bridging the digital native–immigrant divide. First Monday, 14(7).
Photo: Padua College Library, taken 2005 by PJ Buckley
Trish Talks Texts 