This is a great essay by Mitch Resnick and is the foreward to a new edition of Papert’s famous Mindstorms book. A good reminder of his ideas and things that many get wrong – it’s not about the technology. A good read.
“Education has very little to do with explanation, it has to do with engagement, with falling in love with the material.”
So this is a common mantra – that pedagogy should drive technology, not the other way around. In this post (Pedagogy and Technology from a Postdigital Perspective) Dr. Tim Fawns, argues that it is more complex and the two are actually intertwined. Great post, what do you think? Is it more complicated than the tile implies?
Pedagogy and technology are not separate because pedagogy is not just method, and technology is not just a vehicle for performing that method. I would argue that (horse + cart) is the pedagogy, and technology is wrapped up inside that. One cannot first choose a pedagogy and then a technology; pedagogy is the thoughtful combination of methods, technologies, social and physical designs and on-the-fly interactions to produce learning environments, student experiences, activities, outcomes or whatever your preferred way is of thinking about what we do in education. All elements inevitably shape the ways in which the other elements are used and experienced.
Information literacy has been increasingly in the news with “fake news”, other misinformation, outright lies, and conspiracies being spread across social media and traditional media sources. The author of this piece makes the point that often technology is blamed for this growing problem and often also seen as the solution, it is not the root cause nor is more technology the solution. While modern technology, like social media, helps spread these misinformation far and wide and quickly, is it the technology at fault? Can algorithms help fix the problem? The author writes:
In the end, the only way to truly begin to combat the spread of digital falsehoods is to understand that they represent a societal rather than a technological issue and to return to the early days of the Web when we taught society to question what they read online.
From July 2019, Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2019/07/07/a-reminder-that-fake-news-is-an-information-literacy-problem-not-a-technology-problem/#3b47442e6a6f)
In this post, Dean Shareski explores how much time teachers spend searching for “stuff”. I think he makes some great points and observations – how much time do you waste searching for stuff? How can this be cut down? Or – maybe you like searching for stuff, heading down those rabbit holes …
Today’s educator is both blessed and cursed with infinite access to content. While there are many ways to find content and tips to better curate, it still takes time.A lot of time. I also think much of this time is wasted. … The reality is, the internet and youtube provide great content. The trouble is you have to find it.
By the way, take a look at the comments too – interesting exchange and worth some thought. Is this a problem for you? How much of one?
Sean Michael Morris writes about presence and critical pedagogy in this thoughtful piece. How do we create real presence and community in online courses?
Presence, in other words, is not simply showing up to call on raised hands, answer questions, or deliver Powerpoint lectures. Presence is human, all-too human, because education is human, and learning is a problem that humans must solve. And a teacher’s presence must welcome students’ presence so that the community can begin to answer the questions education demands we address.
In this short piece in Inside Higher Ed, Laura Pasquini writes about academics and their digital persona.
In postsecondary education, it is becoming increasingly vital to share your work and practice online. Open and digital channels help colleagues solicit advice, seek out support/collaboration, offer free professional development, share information and resources, and learn in networked communities with common interests. Besides developing a digital presence, higher education staff, administrators and scholars are utilizing social media and digital technologies to support their work, add to their professional development, engage with peers, learn in the collective and publicly in digital spaces and places.
Came across this post on Medium. The author, Ethan Siegel, proposes two questions to determine if you are scientifically literate – and they are not one of those quizzes that ask about science knowledge. The questions are:
Are you aware of what the enterprise of science is?
Do you have an appreciation for how scientific knowledge, understanding and its applications benefit humanity?
He goes on to explain what a yes answer means. In sort it means you can’t just dismiss facts/evidence you don’t agree with – as in anti-vaxers, climate change deniers etc … A good read.
This post, by Matt Harris, reflects something I have been telling my students: just throwing technology into a classroom – be it a Smartboard, iPads, or other device – will not improve achievement – it takes a skilled teacher to make that kind of change.
If you read the read the research or take a deep look at “failed” tech programs, you will find a common thread that putting a computer in a student’s hand does nothing to guarantee any learning. It will not, in isolation, give student any addition skills or knowledge by virtue of access to technology, digital resources, or the Internet. There is no PROMISE in Educational Technology.
Came across this article from the Washington Post via twitter this morning. An interesting look at big data by Pasi Sahlberg and Jonathan Hasak. Pasi, from Finland, is known for his writing and speaking on Finland’s education system – and education in general. The argument is that we rely too much on ‘big data’ and need to look at what happens in the classroom – or ‘small data’. The idea of causation vs correlation are examined. I agree that we do need to hear the stories from teachers, students and others in the system. The stories are dismissed as ‘anecdotal’ – which they are, but a lot of positive ideas can come from examining stories in context. I also think we need big data as well – together both forms can act to improve learning for students. I like several passages from the article, but I will use these two;
These data sets, however, often don’t spark insight about teaching and learning in classrooms; they are based on analytics and statistics, not on emotions and relationships that drive learning in schools. They also report outputs and outcomes, not the impacts of learning on the lives and minds of learners.
Big data has certainly proved useful for global education reform by informing us about correlations that occurred in the past. But to improve teaching and learning, it behooves reformers to pay more attention to small data – to the diversity and beauty that exists in every classroom – and the causation they reveal in the present.
In this article, in one of my favourite journals, Hybrid Pedagogy (and no, not just because I had an article published in it), Sean Michael Morris writes about working in the digital – and in teaching and scholarship. It contains so many wonderful phrases that resonate and make me think. One of my favourite – partly because it is so true for me as well is this,
Right now, the digital is relevant, present, and is that thing that seems to provide the most interesting possibilities and the most contentious challenges in the scholarship and practice of teaching and learning. But it would be a mistake to think that what I do is digital, because what I really do is human.
Take some time and take a read – and check out other articles in this journal, there is lots for contemplation!
Notta Stuff 