Keeping up with the times: IWB

So here I go again - talking about something that I know very little about and trying to sound intelligible whilst doing so. But, as always, a few google searches later and I feel like an expert.... 

Apparently interactive whiteboards are the future of teaching and any school who does not employ this tool, is moving back in time. (I have to admit, I sometimes wonder whether or not stagnation is really such a bad thing, but then I hear my mother's voice telling me only dead fish drift with the stream.) So in the spirit of constant change and innovation, I shall now fantasize about all the way in which I could employ this tool in my specific fields of teaching: Business Studies, Life Orientation and Mathematical Literacy. 

In all of these subjects, the demonstration of topics and seeing the bigger picture of “Where does this fit in the global environment?” can be problematic and an interactive whiteboard does definitely hold a lot of promise in addressing these types of questions. Enabling students to interact with the board also speaks to different learning modalities and will without a doubt will encourage their engagement with the subject. Engagement with social media platforms are also simplified and can thus be incorporated in more and more classes.

Another thing that I think will benefit many schools, is the fact that in a one-computer-classroom, an interactive whiteboard will enable all the students to engage with the technology without having individual access to a computer. This might even save on development costs for the school and I think the government should definitely investigate this option.

All in all, I think that interactive whiteboards will revolutionise education in South Africa, if only we can muster up the guts to actually employ them in our classrooms.

Just a drop from a knowledge-emptied cup.

“When does learning take place?” This question has been asked in so many (if not all) of our classes. Lecturers then proceed to tell us it happens “in the zone of proximal development” or “when knowledge is deconstructed and reconstructed”. Very big words for something so simple and natural. We start learning in the womb – no teacher there to create an “optimal learning environment”. Just the safety and security that our mothers provide.

Therefor I have to wonder sometimes if we are not over complicating these things. Maybe all we need to really be good teachers are respect and understanding for our learners and a little bit of creativity to set their minds free from the constraints that have been placed upon them by this society that strives to take the fun out of learning.

We need to make learning fun again in order to engage learners. When children play, they are relaxed, curious and even adventurous. It is in these early years, that most of our learning takes place (and is most effective) and yet somehow we have convinced ourselves that it is best to discourage children from playing.

In many of the so-called leading educational countries, children go to school from the age of four. They learn how to read and write in two languages before they are five years old. And somehow that has become acceptable, because “We live in a very competitive country” and “We just want our kid to have the best opportunities”. As a result, children spend up to eight hours a day at school.

However, at the current rate of development of knowledge and technology, spending eight hours a day at school from the age of four, is simply not enough. They will never learn all the content. There are not enough hours in a day to do so.

I believe that there is a shift in focus needed. We need to stop sucking the joy out of learning by forcing kids to study content that will be irrelevant in one or two years’ time. We need to move away from this idea that we can simply “teach to the test” and expect learners to just be sponges slurping up all the knowledge that we as teachers spill out of our little knowledge-filled cups. It’s archaic and insulting to the intelligences of our learners.

We need to start teaching learners how to utilise new technologies and adapt to changing knowledge environments and then give them the freedom to explore and engage in the content that interests them.  Maybe we should even make room in those knowledge-filled cups of ours to learn a thing or two from our learners. Just a suggestion.

Teaching kids how to fish.

This week we were asked to think about the possibilities of tech-driven, self-directed, distance learning. It took me a while (in my general sleep-deprived state) to figure out exactly what all of that meant, so, being the nice person that I am, I’ll break it down to layman’s terms.

Distance learning is a concept that is well-rooted in our South-African society and even more so in the international community. Physical access to universities and other learning institutions are simply not always possible (or even convenient) and thus correspondence- or distance learning was born. The process of receiving resources through the postal system has however become very problematic in South Africa. With almost constant issues, such as strikes, “go-slow’s” and transportation problems, our mailing system has become extremely unreliable. Private courier services are benefitting financially from this, but students are losing.

To address the afore mentioned problem, some institutions are now resorting to digital resources such as electronic textbooks, telematics classrooms and online courses. This therefore forms the tech-driven arm of the equation.

Up until this point, everything made a lot of sense to me. The concepts and methodology behind them are intuitive and are being implemented in a lot of instances in our country already. It is the concepts of self-driven learning that took me a while to get a good grasp on.

Self-directed learning basically means that instead of working from a set curriculum with predetermined topics and outcomes, learners are now asked what they think they should learn or what they are interested in learning about. These topics are then explored by the learners themselves. They normally make use of a question as a guiding principle and then do their own research and learning in order to answer the question that they posed to themselves. This method of learning makes very little use of teachers, as all learning are student motivated and teachers are seen primarily as another resource, just like the library and internet.

This sounds almost too good to be true – learners that take control of their own learning and that are intrinsically motivated by their interests and thirst for knowledge?

Well, it kind of is. Although this education method worked in one or two instances in the USA, the vast majority of learners at school level in South Africa, do not have the resources or self-discipline to make this a viable option for the majority of schools.  

However, I do believe that this model of learning will gain popularity over the next few years and that it will definitely play a big role in the way that we think about education in the future. Having learners determine their own curriculum based on their interests and then expecting them to develop the skills to implement said curriculum in their own setting, is effectively teaching learners how to learn instead of what to learn. 

In a world where the amount of knowledge is expanding at an ever increasing pace, this skillset will prepare learners much more efficiently to function independently and effectively. I’m really excited about this model of teaching and I plan to incorporate elements of it in my own classroom in the very near future.

A 90's kid, obsessed with an iPod

Using social media in the classroom is not something that I grew up with. We had textbooks, notebooks and pencils and we turned out alright, didn't we? 

Well, no. And the reason for my answer is right here in the opening paragraph: We claim to be tech savvy, but when it comes down to the push, we kick against change. We have done things in a certain way and we wish to continue in the same manner, because we (the 90's kids) have a love-hate relationship with technology. We literally saw the rise and fall of several technologies and we desperately try to cling to some kind of stability. This attitude needs to change. 

With so many wonderful applications at our disposal and a very eager learner cadre, it would be a natural choice to include more and more social media applications and other technologies in our classrooms. Provided of course that we have the resources to do so. But let's live in fairyland for a moment and fantasize about a few of the possibilities at our disposal.

In the business studies or economics classroom, the events of the outside world play a big part in how we think about certain concepts and systems. Apps such as Flipboard can be utilized to bring focused content from the economic and business spheres into our classrooms. This can lighten up any dreaded piece of theory with a real-world application. Also, teaching learners how to use these apps, empowers them to always be in the know.

Another great app to use for enrichment or reinforcement in the economics and business subjects, would be the Khan Academy app. It explains a wide variety of concepts through use of videos (engaging both the auditory and visual learning styles) and it is quite user friendly.

In another field, Mathematical Literacy, apps are a bit more on the scarce side. This is mainly due to the fact that not many countries cater for this subject and therefor the development of it is lacking a bit. However, I have been able to track down a few apps that hosts past exam papers and there are so many apps focusing on interesting mathematical concepts and patterns, that the development of an exclusive application would be redundant.

Incorporating sites such as YouTube and TED into your classroom, will serve to illuminate and illustrate topics where the traditional chalkboard lacks depth and flexibility.

Let's be clear though: Social media and technology cannot and must not be able to replace the role of the teacher. We must become more flexible in our approach to the use of technologies and social media in our classrooms, for we need to prepare learners to deal with an ever-changing world and rapidly expanding body of knowledge, whilst still remaining teachers (and not becoming robots).

As a 90's kid, the nostalgia of listening to a mixed cassette tape (or even a CD these days), will never escape me. However, I do realize and understand that my iPod has a far greater capacity and reliability. Thus, it is my opinion that teaching learners to respect and cherish the past and, at the same time, to eagerly search for the opportunities that future technologies may bring, should form a vital part of our digital pedagogies.

The Terminator IRL: When technologies dictate their use to us.

This week I'm responding to two articles: Decoding Digital Pedagogy: Beyond the LMS and Decoding Digital Pedagogy: (Un)Mapping the Terrain. Links fir the articles can be found at the end of this post.

I find it weird to think of myself as "becoming a pedagogue" - The word "pedagogy" have only been introduced to me a couple of weeks ago and already it has taken over pretty much everything I do. I see elements of it intertwined in ever day life and it even filters through in conversations with family and friends. 

One of the things in the article that struck me most, was the emphasis that was placed on the lengths to which a pedagogue will go, to inspire and guide learners towards learning. (References were made to hopscotch and blindfolding.) And I have to question if that is really the only way – to think so far out of the box that you become almost impractical?

On the other hand, I completely agree with the comments made on how technology have a nasty way of dictating how we use them. Teachers have become almost obsolete, hiding behind their PowerPoint presentations and YouTube videos. Learning Management Systems have made learners and teachers lazy in the sense that we don't pay attention to each other anymore. And just like in the Terminator franchise, we are allowing our world to become dominated and prescribed to us by the same technologies that were supposed to only make our lives easier and more convenient.

I do feel that technology have a well deserved place in the classroom and that it is a great tool to help visualize difficult concepts, give access to information and empower learners to explore on their own. BUT, I do not believe that it should become the be all and end all of education. Mostly because a computer does not have the ability to take the learner's context into account the way that a teacher does. Yes, computers (and Google) have taken over the authority of knowledge in our classrooms, but we as teachers still have the enormous task of taking that knowledge and breaking it down for the child sitting in front of us, in a manner that he/she will understand and appreciate and in a manner that is understanding, respectful and sensitive to the learner's particular context.

At the end of the day, we need to remember that our learners are not robots and can thus not be treated as such. They need inspiration, they need someone who is going to push their boundaries, and sometimes, they will need someone to put a blindfold on their eyes to bring them back to the basics. I guess I have answered my own question in a way – maybe it not thinking out of the box to the extreme, but perhaps questioning why the box exists and then deciding what to do with it.

Links for the articles:

http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/hybridped/decoding-digital-pedagogy-pt-1-beyond-the-lms/

http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/hybridped/decoding-digital-pedagogy-pt-2-unmapping-the-terrain/

Simply unplugged, or a case of serious load shedding?

For the past two weeks something have been seriously bugging me. In almost all of the classes in my post graduate teaching course, I got the feeling that reality have taken a backseat to the ideal theoretical image of what a school should be, what a good teacher should look like and what he/she should incorporate in his/her classroom.

Yes, I know that we should all aspire to be the best that we can be, but should we build this ideal "teacher persona" simply to be disappointed by the reality of the South African classroom? And should that persona be so dependent on the resources available to the teacher?

The article talks about how technology should not get in the way of good teaching, but should rather serve to enrich it. Beautiful ideal, but what happens when there is no technology to speak of, or only very basic technologies - and that in very limited quantities? What happens in a flipped classroom when there are no means to flip it effectively?

I should probably provide some context to make my meaning (and frustration) more clear:
I've taught at a school of moderate size in a very poor community. The learners (and by implication their parents) did not have enough money to buy books or pencils or have a sandwich for lunch. Resources at the school were extremely scarce and stationary were awarded on a strict quota system. These kids did not have smartphones or tablets. The school had 4 computers for use by the staff. About one quarter of the classes had access to an overhead projector. There were days when there were no chalk for use on the blackboards.

I've been asking myself all week: "How do I reconcile these two extremes? How do I bridge this gap? " And I still don't have an answer.

I do know that learning still took place at that school, despite not having all the facilities that the more affluent schools have. The success of that school boiled down to the teachers and their way of making the best of a bad situation, of being inventive and creative in their teaching methods, of finding new ways to overcome the challenges that were thrown at them everyday and in passing along that non-defeatist attitude to the learners. Is this then considered naked teaching? Or is it simply a case of extreme barriers to education? Unplugged, or did Eskom flip a switch?

I guess one could argue that their inventive methods could be regarded as digital humanities, or that the recycled garbage they sometimes used in math or science class could be seen as technology. I do know however that technological integration in the classroom in the traditional sense (e.g. computers, smartphones, projectors, interactive whiteboards etc.), is probably not a feasible ideal for that school.

The point I'm trying to make is that technology is great, and when it is used for enrichment or the promotion of understanding, it can be a powerful tool in the classroom. The essence of teaching, however, will always be the interaction between learner and teacher and learner and learner. Your worth as a teacher should not be dependent on your PowerPoint proficiency or your ability to fish out inspirational YouTube videos. Your students should be able to form opinions on their own and not be so eager to readily support whatever the media dictates to them.

I'm still trying to figure out how to answer my initial questions, but for now I'm going to climb of my soapbox and go consume some caffeine.