Thinking about it some more, and inspired by Nathan's most recent plug for his Tech Tool (podcasting) during Jonathan Palmer's guest speech, I felt it necessary to share the podcast again here. (Below is the link for the edited version of the interview.) It's with evolutionary biologist and SUNY--Binghamton professor David Sloan Wilson. In it, Wilson talks about how we humans subconsciously perceive our environment(s). One of the directions that the interview takes is how the concept of perceiving one's environment could be related to the learning environment in which students, particularly at-risk students, find themselves when attending school. Beyond the scope of behavior in school, though nonetheless connected to it, is the concept of prosociality (Check out this article about prosociality by Wilson et al.), which Wilson also mentions in the podcast. In a nutshell, prosociality could be succinctly defined as altruism. Being a social studies teacher--well, being a teacher in general, I guess--prosociality seems apropos. Helping students to embrace civic engagement is something that is important in a democracy.
Interview with David Sloan Wilson on On Being (May 2012)
(I encourage you to hear the whole edited interview. But, if you don't want to listen to the entire 50 minutes or so, and want to listen solely to the discussion about school environment, go to 33:50 of the podcast.)
My thinking about teaching with technology had been focused mainly on how we can implement technology in a meaningful and efficacious way within the confines of our classroom and/or by extending the physical classroom to a virtual one. Now, I see teaching with technology as multifaceted insofar as I am no longer just a classroom teacher. Now, I am a practicioner, as well, and using technology to be part of a professional learning community of teachers is something that I have begun to better embrace and now think important. Being a practicioner, for me, is perhaps one of the most important takeaways from the MAC program (Ball and Cohen, 1999). And, it has only been reinforced at my placement (Thurston High School), which has recently implemented a new program called Critical Friends Groups (CFG). In this way, I have been inspired to evolve as a teacher, and technology had helped me to achieve that.
Alex,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading this--big fan of On Being as. It is interesting how technology allows us to share, and yet how it can--paradoxically--also put up barriers. I'm curious to know how the Chromebooks are working out for you, specifically in this respect.
Rory, I felt that I needed to give this adequate time for reflection before responding. I am still confident that I will use technology, including new Tech Tools, in my placement at THS and in my classroom(s) in the future. I have been better able to incorporate the use of Chromebooks more effectively in my lessons at THS and anticipate that I will do so even more throughout the rest of the 2013-2014 academic year. And, I would really like to spend some time working with you so that I could practice using the iPad, stylus, and SMART Board in concert. Nevertheless, I find myself contemplating effective and engaging low-tech ways to hook students, especially after a discussion with Bob Bain about disciplinary heuristics tonight in my Methods class, which only reinforced that pedagogical curiosity of mine. Any thoughts or ideas about going low-tech and being engaging?
ReplyDeleteAlex,
ReplyDeleteNo doubt we can go low-tech and be engaging. In fact, I think it's much easier for us because we have so much tech in the classroom; now low-tech is the treat. On several occasions students have requested that we not use the computers on a given day and/or have commented that they liked not using them. Specifically, the Socratic Seminar format is perfect for this. I do this every Thursday in AP and I'm trying to work it into Genny more frequently. It's necessary to explicitly teach the kids how to have an academic discussion, and then I treat it as a sort of special event, for which kids rotate leading the discussion after I've modeled it several times. The physical arrangement of the room is key here too.
Honestly, I'm finding that the tech is best used for presentation, formative assessment, composition, and collaboration. That might seem obvious, but consider how often we go to tech for "engaging activities" that don't address key literacy skills. Schmoker really got me thinking about that one.
On a final note, I make it a rule to not address the class unless all the computers are closed. I think the ideal classroom moves seamlessly between high and low tech and only as needed. I always think about my own experience, which is why I've been so adamant at times in 504 about people closing their computers when someone is addressing them. As difficult as it is, I'm trying to embrace the "monotask" model of learning.