Teaching with Technology

Marketing Education Review, Volume 19, Number 1 (Spring 2009)

Leighann C. Neilson (Queens University, Ottawa Canada)

POST: Lynn Barnsback

The paper discusses this professors program, the New Tools Briefing (NTB), how it was designed and works. Identifying much the same need we all have, “how to equip our “digital native” or “netgen” students to deal with successive waves of new technology” she developed a program, primary for marketing classes, to address the need.  It is an active learning exercise which, rather than introduce a succession of products, “helps students learn how to assess new   approaches to marketing, including the use of new communication and information technologies”.  It provides a framework for assessment, therefore the learning is not obsolete after the technologies have changed. The lesson is the process and skills learned rather than the subject, or as she puts it “the theoretical knowledge should outlast any technology specific learning.”  The author notes that while she teaches marketing, she often has non marketing (36%) and non business majors (26%) in her class. She believed it can be adapted to other subjects without much effort.

 The NTB is a team based experience including an oral presentation and written report. A list of topics provided by the teacher, and student groups choose one (no duplicates). Through research they answer a detailed series of questions. In addition there are a series of lectures on diffusion of innovation theories – she uses Rogers’s text (2003) – to help support the assignment. A reading list is also provided for each topic to get them started.  Interestingly, she also includes a training session in the library to help develop literacy skills. This would appear remedial however her assessments at the end of the year clearly indicate that the students appreciated and “need” it. It appears this activity gives them a feeling of confidence once they see the plethora of information on the subjects. The presentations are 45 min (up from the original 30) and include a one page hand out that is later included in final testing.

 NTB is an interesting approach to solving some classroom problems: it allows for current, up to the minute information to be included in class; “takes advantage of the many-to-many model of teaching”; alleviates some of the technical pressure off the teacher. The programs emphasis on independent research provides practice in technology evaluation a valuable skill in the marketplace. The value of real world skills application was repeatedly considered valuable by the students during their class evaluation. 

 The author noted, only briefly, the influence of different cultures in the classroom presentations. I think this is interesting, given the student population in the metropolitan DC area. A presentation using smell came across this distinction when using Playdoh and Crayons- these smells were not universally identifiable as had been thought by the presenters. Although not part of the technology learning, this type of active learning and group interaction is always thought provoking and instructional.

 In discussing the obstacles of the program, the author identified the most obvious to many “of a certain age” the attitudinal barrier. Many teachers are not “digital natives” like the students they teach and can feel “under-equipped”. She feels it is more important to be willing to learn with the students, and alert to emerging technologies, rather than proficient. Managing the list of topics and teaching “a theoretical framework for thinking about the subject matter” are the important jobs for her.

 The NTB follows a somewhat familiar pattern in teaching. This does not make it less valuable however. The group project is the core of many classes due to its inherent learning attributes. The framework used to present and initiate the NTB projects is very well thought out, especially the NTB utilization of the Rogers 5 attributes (relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, observability). The “Tools” provided a step by step guide for the thought process without obscuring the learning opportunities. This is a wonderful guide to including a project in a classroom environment. I would be interested to learn more about optimum group size and class size as well as I am sure there are some limitations not discussed.

The author of this article speaks to the need for a broader understanding among teachers and scholars and learning institutions of the role of multimedia production as a form of literacy with its own rhetorical dimensions. Rhetoric, of course, having to do with the art of speaking and writing well, and the five rules (canons) governing human discourse. In the case of new media, however, the rhetorical concerns go beyond audience and purpose to include more specifically form and content. This is dicussed through the author’s experience developing a science-based multimedia website for middle school age students. The author points out that similar to composing written text the initial concern of writers and designers of new media is “the needs, interests and technical concerns of intended users.” In other words, writers/designers must have a sense for what constitutes appropriate content while also considering the capabilities of a new media in question along with the technological know-how of the intended users. The author also speaks to “technological rhetorical concerns” that are more along the lines of the technical understandings a designer would possess that is beneficial to the writer’s skill set as well. This encompasses understanding that how text looks on a particular platform is as important as the message it conveys (or that Apple does not interface with Flash-based websites as Jonathan pointed out in our last session). Writers also need to understand how to incorporate special effects such as sound and other animation into content in ways that serve to further the message in an attractive way. The article goes on to make recommendations for classroom multimedia production projects before making the point that it is up to educators to endow students with these technological skilss so that they may “engage more fully in academic, professional, and civic life.”

 http://www.sciencedirect.com.mutex.gmu.edu/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6W49-4W1JY67-3-1&_cdi=6537&_user=650615&_pii=S8755461509000206&_orig=browse&_coverDate=06%2F30%2F2009&_sk=999739997&view=c&wchp=dGLbVzW-zSkzS&md5=7473beb53ba827fed7aa6d4512765dce&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

Fe Bencosme

In my United States History survey classes at Northern Virginia Community College, like most teachers I ask the students during the first class of the semester to introduce themselves and then respond to two or three questions. My questions include the basics like where you are from, do you have a hobby and what is it, etc. I also include two additional ones which I know the answers for already. First, why are you taking the course? Answer: it is required. Second, do you like History? Generally about 20% respond yes, and the rest don’t like it. Of those that don’t like it, the reasons are usually: I can’t remember facts and details, I don’t think it is relevant today, and it is boring and about old white men.

I’d like to say that after these students complete my course, they all love  History, can remember facts and details, are aware of its relevance, and realize it is an exciting and scintillating experience! While my student evaluations of teaching are generally pretty good and  I do my best,  I realize it is not always good enough to get these types of post class results. I have pondered how to translate my love of History and instill it in my students.  The question is how to get it done.

One thing that I also know, is that when I ask my students what their hobbies are, a vast majority like to play video games, download and listen to music, and religiously use My Space and FaceBook. Further, they don’t bring the same enthusiam for these new media activities to using Blackboard! In fact, it is hard to get them to check it and use it.

While teaching History is not my only job, it is the one I like doing the most and it is the reason I am seeking a Certificate in College Teaching in the Higher Education Department at GMU. I am taking this course, Teaching with Technology, to get my teaching in line with the way my students live and learn. I’m also taking it because it is a requirement for the Certificate, but that is a bad reason and tends to tick off the professor (I know it does that for me in my classes), but we are all friends here, right, and this is a learning community!!

So what do  I use in my teaching? I use Blackboard, but not the Discussion part.  I use Powerpoints with some imbedded videos. I lecture in class. I use discussion groups for specific topics. I require student class presentations. I require two papers and give tests. I use You Tube videos on interesting subjects.  I know I am not using the available technology and it is disturbing to me, especially given the media savvy students. I can do better and they can learn better if I get better in using Technology.

So, my goal for this course is specifically to learn to use Technology more effectively in my US History survey classes at NOVA.  I hope to be able to rewrite the courses I teach to incorporate more technology and to actually do so while completing the Internship requirement for the Certificate. That way I can actually use what I have learned in the program in my courses.

All that being said, my interest is finding a journal to blog about that will give me current Technology uses in History courses. Unfortunately, my quest to find such a journal, specific to History, has been difficult. I have settled upon Teaching History: A Journal of Methods (http://www.emporia.edu/socsci/journal/main.htm) , and the Journal of the Association for History and Computing (http://mcel.pacificu.edu/jahc/). The former is generally about History with some technology articles, while the latter is purely about Technology uses in History.  I’d like to pick from both depending upon the relevance of the articles I discover.

I plan to continue to search for another journal related to History and Technology, but I am not optimistic on finding one. I have reviewed the Center for History and New Media website at GMU to determine which journals they cite in their listing of relevant digital articles. Unfortunately, they are from numerous journals and appear to be one off articles in the chosen journals.

I look forward to reading the blogs of the other students to get a broader view of Technology uses which can be tailored for my use in History as well.

My interest in working with Generation 1.5 writers began back in August 2006 when I had just started my first year as an eight grade Language Arts teacher in an American college preparatory school in the Dominican Republic capital of Santo Domingo. No sooner than the first weeks into the semester–and noticing that the majority of my students’ work was liberally plagiarized–had I proposed a writing program for the English curriculum. Thankfully, it was the D.R. where education is less regulated than here in the United States, so a go ahead from administration would turn out to be an opportunity for both me and my students. For them it would be the luxury of a personal writing coach and for me a new niche for myself. By the time I left the school in December 2009, I had managed to establish a computer-based writing center where nearly 200 high school students “workshopped” once a week. It was a move based solely on a hunch that proved to be a good one: Students were engaged and apparently enjoying the process, but, most important to me, they were producing work all of their own making. Well, at least the majority of them.

I want to continue working with this expanding group of students who are American-educated speakers of English as a second language, many of whom are right here in the United States in public secondary classrooms. In a prefect world I would replicate the Workshop in a community of Gen 1.5-ers here and in need of additional academic support. This time around, however, I would have to inform my practices on pedagogical theory and practice, which is the reason why I am here at George Mason, and the basis for choosing Computers and Composition as the professional journal I will explore for our knowledge-building assignment.

Beyond exploring how computers can be used in composition classrooms, Computers and Composition(published by Ohio State University) also looks at how teaching writing can be enhanced through the careful study and integration of new media on new paper–if you will–called “digital composing environments”. To begin I will look at the article “Paradox and Promise: MySpace, Facebook, and the sociopolitics of social networking in the writing classroom.” It seemed like a good place to begin as my impulse to jump on the new media band wagon is tempered some by fears of possibly creating legions of young people crippled in other ways as a result of overexposure to the Internet.

I do recognize, though, that my fears stem from my lack of a full understanding of what exactly is meant by new media education. Even scarier is the fact that the rate by which these changes are taking place may mean that I will never fully understand the buzz surrounding the topic. But that is no reason to not inform myself. If I’m not going to buy into the hype, I should at least have a sound basis for my decision.

To be continued…

Fe Bencosme