Wow, this
week was a tough one! We were asked to analyze and provide our opinions
relating to the following short analogy by Prensky and the discussions that
followed were quite thought provoking!
“Students think and learn differently from their
teachers because while the formers are digital language native speakers the
latter have, at best, learnt their digital language as a foreign language.
Thus, while our students have native speaker intuition, teachers do not.”
From the
start of this week, things had been a bit frustrating for me and considering
that this article was written in 2001, the question was a bit removed from the
reality faced by many teachers from the new school. Though I’m entering my 8th
year of teaching and probably the 11th or 12th year working
as an educator in schools, I still consider myself to be quite young and savvy
with the technology I deem important and
choose to use. Tech has always been around me and was integrated into the
learning experience in university. I can confidently express my belief that I
am a native not an immigrant when it comes to that silly discussion about
natives and immigrants. I would assume that nearly all teachers who graduated
from University the same year (2006) or after me will be quite adept at using
technology on a personal or professional level, so again, to be pleasantly
nondescript, I think the analogy is a bit crusty.
Of course,
if possible I’d like to restructure a few of these boisterous statements, given
the possibility that my hackles may have been riled by Prenkeys’ presumptuous statement!
Upon further reflection of my university experience and having the gaps in my
selective memory filled by objections from my wife, I began to have second
thoughts about the true degree of technological exposure I supposedly experienced
in University. Umm, let’s see…a projector, a whiteboard and erasable ink pen, a
pc connected to the projector, an elmo (a machine that magnifies and projects what is written and
being written on paper, and the occasional PowerPoint or video played from the
internet. Upon, further reflection of my primary and secondary schooling, I
recall the technology use being quite limited to the parameters of teacher led
lectures, oodles of note taking by students and the occasional hands on group
project to be worked on and presented in class. So, while I will stick to my
claim of feeling quite comfortable with technology, I must retract my claim
that I was inundated with technology in the same fashion as the students of
today.
On another
note, Presnky’s analogy had the effect of being a bit personally offensive as I
am a L2 teacher of my native language but perhaps fall a few years outside the
cohort ascribed to so called digital native and therefore am classified as an
immigrant technology user within my own native tongue.
By the way,
are there a bounded number of years that classify immigrants and digital
natives’?
A bit later,
I discovered that 1983 right up to 1994 currently stands as the years marking
the first wave of digital natives and I am at least comforted that I fall into
that stage but perhaps not really, since I was only just born in 1983 J.
Though it
may have taken some time, I eventually transitioned past the anger and disgust brought
on by strong, data-less, generalizations and I began to enjoy the wonderful dialogue
(both in the readings and forum) that was made possible by Prensky’s volatile
dichotomy. A full range of questions began to revolve in my mind and I
especially enjoyed the shared consensus that though youth or even teachers may
be experts at using technology (personally or in a technical sense) that doesn’t
mean we instinctually possess the pedagogical awareness of how best to merge
this knowledge of technology with a more effective delivery of content that
enriches the classroom environment and meets the diverse needs of all involved
participants.
In regards to
such assuredly broadcasted proclamations on the indelible future of technology
dominated learning environments, I began to ponder…
What will go the
way of the dodo bird next? The pencil, paper, books, speech, scientific theory?
How much must be relinquished in order to progress and how do we weigh and
assess the value and superiority of the tools replacing older technologies and
methods?
As an argument against the supposition that the
result of being encapsulated in a technology enhanced environment conditions
the development of uncanny brain power and abilities for children of the
future, I thought…
Simply being
immersed and surrounded by technology doesn't make you a digital native or a
fluent speaker "participant" of the digital world. It is the nature
of interaction and activities that define the level of one's digital proficiency.
It is highly probable
that a digital natives’ level of fluency and proficiency with technological
tools varies from subject to subject (academically) based on personal interest,
skills and other factors.
And lastly, representing the bastion of the old
guard whom are naturally wary of all things new, especially the slightest change
to old methods, I furrowed my brow, clenched my jaw and seriously pondered…
What impact
does the dominance of technology have on retention, memorization, allocating
value to new information (especially that outside of one's direct interest) and
mastery of skills and concepts?
No comments:
Post a Comment