Monkey scribbles …

I was interested in a post by Kearney (2009) entitled ‘Young people as ‘digital bricoleurs’. The term bricoleurs was the thing that grabbed my attention given it was a term that I had not seen before. Kearney (2009) refers to the metaphor as being “… most suitable for thinking about the type of new media activities some children are participating in”. He continues by stating that “As well as reading, critiquing and listening to new media, these young people are typically creating, ‘mashing’, publishing and ‘talking around’ personally and culturally meaningful artefacts”.  In essence, Kearney is referring to technology and digitilisation; students and their ability to develop, create and accept ownership of artefacts; valuing, culture and change; user-friendliness and accessibility of collaboration tools; and, the audience for whom the artefacts have been created and, how they might “explore, share and interact with others”. 

Reflection

1.  What is your understanding of the term ‘bricoleur’?

2.  What place do ‘Young people as digital bricoleurs’ have in classrooms today?

References (used in Kearney’s post)

Brown, J. (2000). Growing up digital: How the web changes work, education, and the ways people learn. Change, March/April, 11-20.


Hsi, S. (2007). Conceptualizing learning from the everyday activities of digital kids.
International Journal of Science Education, 29:12, 1509 – 1529 

O’Keefe states that “if you find yourself increasingly puzzled or frustrated with Generation Y, you might be interested in what Michael McQueen has to say”. Generation Y’s approach to the world can be closely aligned with the idea of fast food. As McQueen states “They want everything to be fast and if it’s not quick or instantaneous, the message that’s been given to them by places like McDonald’s is that it’s their right to complain or seek an alternative”. At the Australian Secondary Principals Association (ASPA) conference, McQueen discussed the key challenges that this generation poses for schools and teachers, and outlines strategies for educators.

Douchy’s Weblog discusses some pertinent issues related to McQueen’s new book The ‘New’ Rules of Engagement. Douchy considers in particular the concepts of RESPECT and COMMUNICATION and makes four predictions from his own reading and reflections. Finally, he states: “Am I building communication channels, or dams?” A worthwhile read is the recommendation by Douchy for all educators of McQueen’s new book.

McQueen highlights the challenges of TRUTH, RESPECT, COMMUNICATION, PATIENCE, and LEARNING within this generation of students. He challenges educators to consider “… do they focus students on complying which is all about saying they should, or do they get them to commit to something and give them a reason why?”

As educators, we are left to consider the importance of showing students the relevance of what they are learning – and – what we teach students must connect with the real world and with everything else that they know. 

Have you ever been “Googled” or maybe “Googled” somebody else?

I have, and it set me back a little to realise how much information was out there and easily accessible to many at the touch of a finger on a keyboard about my professional experiences. This has been further reinforced by a recent article by Richardson (2008) that I have read that describes the concept of “Digital Footprints in the Digital Age“. Richardson refers to the “consequences of the new Web 2.0 world that these digital footprints are being woven into the fabric of almost every aspect of our lives”. A personal footprint allows others to view an online portfolio of your achievements and information gathered from sources including blog posts, news articles, Facebook groups, YouTube videos and builds a picture of various aspects of your involvement and daily interests.

“Whether we like it or not, social Web technologies are having a huge influence on students who are lucky enough to be connected, even the younger ones” (Richardson, 2008). He continues by stating that “they’re creating all sorts of content—some, as we all know, doing so very badly—and they’re doing all sorts of things with online tools that, for the most part, we’re not teaching them anything about. In the process, they’re becoming Googleable without us”. By and large, they do all this creating, publishing, and learning on their own, outside school, because when they enter the classroom, they typically “turn off the lights” (Prensky, 2008).

What are our thoughts on digital footprinting? Are there issues that we as educators should be considering when informing and teaching our students about the many facets of technology and being aware of who is out there and what they can see/read?

Reference

Balista, H. (July 17, 2007). Our Digital Footprints: Google’s (and Microsoft’s) most valuable asset. *reference for image include in post

Prensky, M. (2008). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 40–45.

Richardson, W. (2008). Digital Footprints in the Digital Age. Educational Leadership, 66(3), 16-19.

Did you know that “This year’s crop of Year 12 students was born at the same time as the first web browser (Head, 2008)?”

With the vast changes in technology, online growth and access to resources has been so fast that students today are able to access more than 100 million websites – amazing!

Students entering today’s classrooms are digital natives who have grown up with technology and are not aware of a lifestyle that does not include computers, mobile phones, electronic gaming and the many other things that are a natural part of their day. This interest and knowledge of technology by the “natives” impacts on teaching, delivery of lessons and engagement of individuals. There are professional development needs by the “immigrants”, as they consider effective ways in which to use technology as a tool for learning, recording assessments and meeting syllabus outcomes.

John Pegg, professor in mathematics and education at the University of New England, who co-authored the Partnerships in ICT Learning (PICTL) study (October, 2007) stated that he believed there was “a profound gap between what people hope rolling out computers into schools will do, and what will more likely be achieved”. He continued by commenting that by “Just paying for computers to be installed in schools is the easy option … the hard work is the professional development of teachers and updating of assessment techniques”.

Reflection

1. What do you see as important in terms of teacher professional development relating to the use of ICT?

2. Have you experienced any worthwhile ICT professional development that has assisted you in your classroom practice?

Reference

Head, B. (September 2008). Who’s Teaching Who? Education Review: Technology Guide.

Available at: www.educationreview.com.au; www.campusreview.com.au 

Partnerships in ICT Learning (PICTL) study

Available at: http://www.digitaleducationrevolution.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/36691A6C-2772-484C-A9F7-30F51A1B83E6/22590/pictl_case_studies1.pdf

“Social networks, simulations, and digital gaming are bridging the gap between traditional scholastic culture and today’s learners”. Graf & Haas (September/October 2008) consider the way in which educators, researchers, and designers are just beginning to explore the educational benefits of social networking technologies. They believe that social networking technologies assist teachers and students “to extend their learning into an additional space, a space for communicating, collaborating, sharing ideas, and sharing learning”. Experiential learning involving hands-on, real-world experiences are the ideal way in which students actively engage in the learning process and actually learn material. The experiences involve concepts and knowledge related to classroom content. We are reminded that the use of technology, as a tool, in classroom learning situations has to be thought out clearly and purposefully. Tools, when used properly, can provide tremendous value to students and teachers.

Reflection

How would you implement social networking technologies into your classroom teaching and/or KLA?

Reference

Groff, J. & Haas, J. (September/October 2008), Learning & Leading with Technology. pp. 12-13.

Prensky (2001; 2005/2006) identifies that students today have radically changed from those that our educational system was designed to teach. With the arrival of technology and the quick uptake of such by individuals, we now have a generation who have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using tools of this digital age. Prensky (2001) has grappled with different ideas of how best to refer to these students. Given the ease of how they speak and use the digital language he has chosen to call them “digital natives”; the older generation that has not had so much exposure to the technological tools is compared to these natives as “digital immigrants”.

An interesting discussion and implementation of language that clearly categorises and distinguishes between the alternate learning and engagement patterns of students that we are preparing to work with in (classroom) learning spaces today. Prensky (2006) quotes a student as saying “… school didn’t teach me to read – I learned from my games”.

For consideration & reflection

1. How do you see technology assisting students in classrooms of the 21st century?

2. Do you think that there is a language barrier between the “natives” and “immigrants” in the digital culture?

3. What is your understanding of “legacy” content versus “future” legacy?

4. How do we as educators, consider ways of teaching in the language used by “digital natives”?

References

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–2. Available: (NB. can do ‘natives’ test here: http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/digitalnatives/index.htm )

Prensky, M. (2005/2006) Listen to the Natives. Educational Leadership. 63(4), 8-13
Avialable at: http://www.ascd.org/authors/ed_lead/el200512_prensky.html