March 3, 2005
Think Educational TV
Cognitive Dissonance » Double Duh!
Once again, Nate provides some good fodder for discussion. I also have Educating the Net Generation (PDF) on my reading list but it is behind a couple of other things. One quick point here that I am trying to impress on people who are enamored with electronic games for learning. I think gaming (or other tech) can provide excellent instructional benefit, it is that we have to be aware that learner expectations are set by commercial products.
The more complex answer is that the Net Genners demand more than the systems are able to provide. To a Net Genner, the online classroom is a slum.
Many years ago, TV (and before that, radio) was seen as the answer to educational issues. How well have these done to change education? Certainly they added a new flavor but the programs did not match up to the expectations that the commercial products could provide. Like it or not, these commercial sources set the expectations of Net Genners. Any "educational" [insert technology here] risks becoming a very pale imitation (i.e. slum) version of what learners see in other places. But it is not what the system provides, it is how the system is used that creates the real problem. I believe it is much less about a particular medium, and much more about the methods employed when utilizing the medium. Seems there is a little debate in ed tech literature about this :)
In other words, IM is a revolutionary technology and can be used to great advantage to engage students. the problem is that, as educators, we don't know how to use it in the same way our students do when talking to 8 people at the same time in different windows.
Another issue is that when students use such technologies on their own, they are learning. They just are not learning the stuff we want them to! But that is an issue for another post.
Posted by Rovy at March 3, 2005 7:37 AM