I've been mulling over ideas for a while, and the conference brought them to a head for me, so I thought I'd toss out a few questions to the people most likely to be thinking of them:
1) Are we advocating technology for technology's sake? I feel as if the value and use of a lot of tools is glossed over by the fact that they are shiny and new, and that, more dangerously, the negative repercussions of other tools and methods are dismissed using the ad hominem technique of dismissing valid concerns by accusing the critiquer of being a Luddite and anti-progress.
I love how some tools make my life easier. But I also find that the number of resources required to advocate for, purchase, install, learn, update, prepare resources to accompany, administer, evaluate, and utilize effectively a tool is often grossly underestimated, and that while "money" is usually considered a resource, "time" and "joy" are not considered.
2) Can we examine the issues of privilege in terms of access to technology? I noticed, speaking with colleagues, that my "normal" and their "normal" are very different. Access for teachers runs from 1:1 ratio of laptops to students to classes where half the students own no computer (or have a computer, but dialup, or no internet). Also, a large number of the resources and tools mentioned are either banned in schools (e.g. ipods) or blocked from schools (youtube, facebook).
Are we inadventently creating an underclass? Do we have the right to dismiss these students when they're clearly already at a disadvantage? I was and am surprised at how easily this issue is skipped over with a blithe "They'll catch up" or "well, really, that's hardly a majority of students", especially in an atmosphere that is supposed to be supportive of differentiating for needs and understandings and cultural/socioeconomic factors.
3) I'm finding a repetition of two underlying assumptions needs questioning as well. First, that "in our day this technology wasn't available, and so the kids know more than we do and of course we're resistant." In my day, the Internet was available, and I used it, often. I'm a teacher, but I'm also a digital native. Furthermore, my students know markedly less than I do about it. Explaining icanhascheezburger to a room full of animal loving but completely unknowing faces is interesting.
The second attaches to the first - that kids know more than we do. In my case, my students not only know less, but fall into two distinct groups - the academic level kids who are online, wired, modible, IM'ing, and Facebooking, and the applied/college level students who say things like "I don't understand that whole facebook thing." and "MSN sucks. I just use the phone." (further questioning of the second reveals that "texting is stupid, but at least I don't have to spell on it - but usually I talk). Again, literacy is a focus - media and text literacy. The same kids who don't like reading WILL read emails - but it's still not the preferred mode. Can we help these kids catch the e-bug? Ought we?
Thank you for not simply saying tl;dr. (too long;didn't read)
Diana
Keywords: e-learning, leading learning, Privilege, questioning practice, teaching
2 comment(s)