Earlier today, @mesterman prompted me to read another blog post by the continually inspiring @mrkrndvs: Vision for eLearning. A confident and provocative post, there is a lot to take from Aaron’s work. However, there was a point I felt I had to make to Aaron on Twitter and the resulting discussion involving @rgesthuizen, @ozjuliancox, @rhonimcfarlane prompted this blog post.
Basically, the issue is:
“it has to be student action …not voice. I prefer to label it as having students active in integrating tech“
My current slog through a PhD, researching Improvements to Technology Integrated Pedagogy: The Role of K-12 Students, has this description:
“Personal experience in the field of involving students as an active element in the technology integration process indicates to me that their involvement could greatly influence its success. In a variety of capacities, students can take an active role in how technology is used in classrooms, how and what their peers should learn, sharing their existing knowledge and the best approaches in using technology to meeting the needs of learning exercises and students (Mullen, 2015). The role does not need to be confined to classroom practice, however. It can be seen in physical design of learning spaces (Classrooms of the Future, 2003) and in decision-making around the enhancement of technology enabled learning, advising on policy and curriculum matters (State Government Victoria Dept of Education and Training, 2014).Describing students as having an active role, in this research, is intended to highlight where they are empowered and given responsibilities involving the use of technology in school. Inactive, or for want of better terminology, indirect action by students exists in most schools. Examples of these range from self-organised online study groups to personal use of technology in learning such as choosing digital methods for presenting work. I also see active roles as those that are sanctioned by the school and a component of the learning process. These do no cover non-sanctioned ways such as having a mobile text conversation with a friend as a distraction from classroom activities.”
- between those in education who think they have done enough to ‘modernise’ and empower their school by letting students have a voice, for example in a student council but there only real power is at such a low level as changing the quality of the toilet paper as opposed to those who are willing to let their students get involved in education decision-making from top to bottom, real projects that they own, learn from and learn with the staff in the school and communities beyond
- that technology continues to revolutionise education, to upset the traditional relationships and roles that have existed for centuries. I love this as an explanation:
“We now face a situation in which the teachers and experts, who know more than the learners about the ‘stuff’ we want people to learn, may well not know as much as the learners about the technologies that could act as learning tools. There is now a real opportunity for reciprocal teaching and learning.” (Luckin, 2008)