As I think about ways to use technology in my classes to enhance my teaching and my students learning, I keep coming back to the basic premise that teachers still need to be enthusiastic, innovative and engaged in their approach to teaching and students still need to care about learning. This seems pretty obvious, but I believe that all the technology in the world won’t make a difference if you don’t have those two ingredients.
What will make a teacher better by using technology? There is a lot to be said (and a lot has been said, both in our blogs and in the technical research!) about using the medium that our learners are comfortable with (new media/technology). However, the fact that our learners are generally excellent at social networking, texting, getting current music downloads, viewing videos on line, and playing games, however elaborate, doesn’t mean that they care about transferring such skills to educational pursuits. The teachers still need to come up with stimulating learning activities which engage the students, and the students need to care about learning.
From a teacher’s perspective, how can they get better at teaching by using technology. Let me address that from a History teacher perspective. Basically, there are two general learning objectives for students in History. First, there is foundational knowledge – whether we want to accept it or not, students need to know some facts (Who was George Washington? What was D-Day?). Even though technically every bit of historical fact is able to be found on the internet, there is some basic level of foundation knowledge that is needed by students.
Second, there is the ability to think critically and evaluate data. This is probably a learning goal on every syllabus in every class in higher education. In History, this means being able to critically analyze a question, understand the related facts, and come to a conclusion assessing various points of view (Was George Washington a good leader?, Was D-Day an effective way to defeat Germany in World War Two?).
Techonology can be used in to more effectively teach both foundational knowledge and critical thinking. Use of film clips, music, Wikipedia, blogs, on line research and discussion all have their place. However, students must get engaged, and learning about and analyzing the past is not going to cut it to get a lot of students engaged. How could it? By the very fact they are into new media and cutting edge developments in technology, why should they care about who George Washington was and whether he was a good leader?
I believe that the History teacher must add a third component to teaching to get the student engaged – relevance. Here is where I believe techology could have a fascinating impact. This could encompass projects like taking Washington and comparing the things he faced as a leader with Barack Obama, for example. The technology to be used would be the full range of items mentioned above. Note that technology can enhance the learning experience, but making it relevant is what the teacher provides using technology to enhance it, not replace it.
Looking to the student side of things, will using technology enhance their learning experience? They still need to be motivated to learn. My reaction is that a number of students will think technology will create more work. Collaborative learning in a face to face or distance basis or some hybrid takes more time than traditional teaching. For example in this class (CTCH 603) do you notice that reading everyone’s blogs and comments seems to be a lot of work, especially given the other course requirements? But, we are graduate students and motivated. To truly get the most out of any of the technological tools (like blogs) will require the students to be motivated to do more. I am not sure this will be universally accepted by students.
I firmly agree with Jenkins and the teaching of his 11 skills needed by students. At the same time, I’d say that the basics, teachers being creative in developing the teaching tools and students coming in with a motivation to learn, are prerequisites.
Good point. Probably using technology allows the student to have access to a veritable treasure trove of information so that they can choose the relevance for themselves. Instead of limiting students to certain topics to put presentations together about, general guidelines can be given so that they can choose the relevance for themselves. Maybe the relevance of George Washington as a leader (based on foundational knowledge taught in the course) is relevant to them in assessing a current leader or public figure or event that they find relevant. Seems like it rwould equire some serious guidelines to make it work.
While driving earlier this evening I heard a couple of Mason economics department faculty on CSPAN radio talking about the relevance of Adam Smith’s writings to contemporary life. Smith wrote about how filling our pockets with gadgets (in his time, such things as toothpick holders) wouldn’t make us happy: good conversations with friends would.
I’m struck in our readings how often youth utilize technology as a means of making human connections with peers, even where MMOGs are concerned.
All of which is to say, I agree with your premise that enthusiastic teachers and motivated students are critical. Given those ingredients, these digital tools make possible extensions of our respective reaches over time and space – and thus learning opportunities – that are unprecedented.
I agree that relevance is important when teaching history. The challenge is that relevance changes for each student. One student might be intrigued by comparing Obama and Washington. Another might be unaware of the effects on European history of the expulsion of Jews and Muslims from Spain the 15th century. How many students might become more interested in medieval history after reading a good biography of Eleanor of Aquitaine?
So – how can technology help identify those triggers?