Category: Week 3 – Engaging the Imaginations of Digital Learners

Storytelling and Technology: The Keys to Effective Education

There were two ideas that stood out to me this week: lecture and technology.

My favorite point about lecture is that it is good for telling stories. This plays into an innocence we have. Storytelling, hopefully, reminds us of being read to as a child or hearing a great story from a family member or friend. We have an innate curiosity about the plot of other people’s lives. In fact, storytelling is one of the oldest forms of communication, and if done right, it is unbelievably captivating.

Most recently, the rise of TED talks and podcasts have re-illuminated this platform. Everyone loves a good story, and these platforms allow great stories to be shared worldwide.  How are they shared, though? Technology. Technology allows for information to be rapidly spread, which contributes to learning. In a traditional classroom, though, not all subject matter lends itself to storytelling and not all professors have a story to tell. This is where technology and storytelling can be blended to reach students. With a little Googling, I would venture to say that every teacher could find something relevant to their course, allowing storytelling to be a part of his or her curriculum.

Here is the truth: technology is here to stay. Full bans and full embraces of it are ineffective. Like most things in life, the key is moderation. Technology has wonderful uses in the classroom, but it is also can be highly distracting. Regardless, my favorite point deals with the effectiveness as a teacher. An engaging teacher will captivate students to the point that they put down the technology. This should always be the goal of a teacher: be more exciting than someone’s phone or computer. The other thing that is critical to remember, though, is that we are all human. We have thoughts in our heads that extend beyond the classroom, and a student can be just as distracted by thoughts as they are by technology, so it’s not always the device that is the problem; it is the most convenient thing to blame, though.

My final point plays into my research and general paradigm about education. Technology is one of the greatest equalizers we have; ignoring it would be stupid. In a perfect world, every student would have access to the same level of education regardless of socioeconomic status or geographic location. As it currently stands, this is far from the truth. Where a student lives and how much money they have basically controls their educational path. Technology can help to change this. If every kid could have a device, the internet, and educational platforms at their disposal, they could potentially learn more than their school could provide. Yes, of course motivation is a key factor here, but having the access to education via technology is a start.

POST 2: It’s your tuition, it’s your choice…or is it mine?

In the spirit of my recent blog post on connectivity, as well as the additional classroom discussions from this week, I feel it is only right to continue the conversation of connection into another area of the classroom- particularly, our students and their connection with devices (phones, tablets, computers, etc).

After reading Anya Kamenetz‘s piece, Laptops and Phones In The Classroom: Yea, Nay Or A Third Way?, I could not help but ponder, and even dwell on, how I address technology usage in my own class. And perhaps more importantly, if I address it correctly or if there even is a “correct” way to address it.

Kamenetz does such a great job of offering a number of different opinions and viewpoints from professionals around the country, all of whom are far more credible than me, which I appreciate. However, in doing so, I was left more lost on the topic than when I started. In addition, I kind of felt like I fit into a number of views, as opposed to just one, which further complicated the matter.

To begin, I have always had the attitude that what students do during their time in my class is their choice, I should not, nor can I, control them. While I do not say this explicitly to them, as my title suggests, it’s their tuition, it’s their choice. My only rule is that as long as what they are doing does not distract those around them, they are free to use their phones and their computers as they please. What works best for their learning, works best for me.

My reasoning for this is pretty simple: 1. It is a 50 minute class and pretty much everything I cover will be important, so they really have no reason to be distracted by a computer or phone anyways- aka, I beat them to the punch, 2. Some students do better with taking notes on their computer/tablet/etc. so why deprive them of that freedom and advantage? and 3. Given the structure of the course, much of our time is spent interacting with one another anyways, so the need for them is limited.

However, as noted, in reading the piece I could not help but think twice about my approach. At times I got caught thinking that maybe technology is not necessary and I should ban it, except for in the case of an emergency. Yet in doing this I might deprive a student from their ability to learn to the best of their ability, which is not fair to them. I then thought, what if I involved technology as a tool for learning? Maybe that could work. Regardless of how I spun it, I was flip flopping between views and approaches and honestly even until now, I still do not know what is correct.

Perhaps their is no correct answer. Perhaps it is dependent on the instructor. Perhaps it is more dependent on the group of students that semester. Who even knows. What I do know, or at least what I think I know, is this: technology is only going to advance further and become more pervasive in the lives of our students. What might work now, may not work in 5 years. What works in 5 years, might not work now.

As future classroom leaders I think it is not only beneficial, but also imperative to think about the classroom environment that we plan to create for those students. Regardless of whether it involves cellphones and computers, it is our duty to foster a space where learning and connection can occur, because while it may be their tuition, perhaps we do have a little say in the whole thing.

Thanks for making it this far- I’d love to hear your thoughts, feedback, or other!

Week 3 – Engaging the Imaginations of Digital Learners

In thinking about how the field of communication can participate in the conversation about digital learners, I feel that the discipline is positioned to be a pioneer in education for the digital age.

I am a media scholar. In laymen terms, I research how media (from videos, to photos, to writings) impact the lives and identities of individuals and their overarching societal culture. Take for instance what classrooms look like- thirty years ago, people were taking notes by hand and attendance to lectures was necessary to succeed. Nowadays, as discussed in class, we are living in an age where information is instantly available and readily shared. The very culture of higher education is changing, shifting, trying to reflect the lives of the students they serve.

I feel the need, at this point, to point out that sentence again. The very culture of higher education is changing, shifting, trying to reflect the lives of the students they serve. I personally struggle with the “research first, students second” approach I have noticed at various universities. Of course, research is an integral part of education and vital to the growth of academic disciplines. However, if we are ignoring our students’ needs, their specific path to success, just in order for academics to pump out research, I think we are failing as educators in higher education.

We mentioned that there is no blanket statement, so clear one-size-fits-all way of teaching students today. However, I would argue that the same applied to students thirty years ago, and will continue to be true thirty years in the future. Students are ever-evolving, adapting to technological advances in society that inevitable impact the way they learn. I think it is vital for educators to take these advancements and changes into consideration and try to apply them in the classroom.

Take communication research, for example. Performative studies can be applied to the way people perform their identities online, so we should be integrating those points into our lectures. We should encourage students to apply concepts to their own lives- their actual, complex, messy lives!

The Talbert article (“Four Things Lecture is Good For“) really stood out to me, particularly how “information transfer” was not on the list. Rather, there is an emphasis on teachers performing their research, engaging students and connecting. I specifically loved the section about telling stories- in communication studies, we are very aware of how narratives shape our sense of reality and help us to connect with one another. Therefore, I think other disciplines can apply their own stories to lectures, offering students an opportunity to connect to their professors deeper. After all, a student who is thriving in their imagination and passions is more likely to be engaged and thrive in your class.

Week 3 – Engaging the Imaginations of Digital Learners

In thinking about how the field of communication can participate in the conversation about digital learners, I feel that the discipline is positioned to be a pioneer in education for the digital age.

I am a media scholar. In laymen terms, I research how media (from videos, to photos, to writings) impact the lives and identities of individuals and their overarching societal culture. Take for instance what classrooms look like- thirty years ago, people were taking notes by hand and attendance to lectures was necessary to succeed. Nowadays, as discussed in class, we are living in an age where information is instantly available and readily shared. The very culture of higher education is changing, shifting, trying to reflect the lives of the students they serve.

I feel the need, at this point, to point out that sentence again. The very culture of higher education is changing, shifting, trying to reflect the lives of the students they serve. I personally struggle with the “research first, students second” approach I have noticed at various universities. Of course, research is an integral part of education and vital to the growth of academic disciplines. However, if we are ignoring our students’ needs, their specific path to success, just in order for academics to pump out research, I think we are failing as educators in higher education.

We mentioned that there is no blanket statement, so clear one-size-fits-all way of teaching students today. However, I would argue that the same applied to students thirty years ago, and will continue to be true thirty years in the future. Students are ever-evolving, adapting to technological advances in society that inevitable impact the way they learn. I think it is vital for educators to take these advancements and changes into consideration and try to apply them in the classroom.

Take communication research, for example. Performative studies can be applied to the way people perform their identities online, so we should be integrating those points into our lectures. We should encourage students to apply concepts to their own lives- their actual, complex, messy lives!

The Talbert article (“Four Things Lecture is Good For“) really stood out to me, particularly how “information transfer” was not on the list. Rather, there is an emphasis on teachers performing their research, engaging students and connecting. I specifically loved the section about telling stories- in communication studies, we are very aware of how narratives shape our sense of reality and help us to connect with one another. Therefore, I think other disciplines can apply their own stories to lectures, offering students an opportunity to connect to their professors deeper. After all, a student who is thriving in their imagination and passions is more likely to be engaged and thrive in your class.

Grad 5114 – What Should Learning Look like in 2051?

A common element in science fiction / speculative fiction is an advanced form of learning – the matrix has its super fast virtual reality programs and 2001 has a similar accelerated information transfer system which allows David Bowman to have the knowledge of three “modern” (re. 1968) specialists. These advances all speak to what is treated in our readings (look under 9/5) as an obsolete concept of what learning is – per “New Culture”‘s second chapter, “A tale of two cultures”: “The ultimate endpoint of a mechanistic perspective is efficiency: The goal is to learn as much as you can, as fast as you can.” – Thomas & Brown If this is obsolete, what is the new form of advanced learning? If any of the authors we’re reading this week were to write an idealistic novella, novel, short story, &c. set in the future, how would their characters be learning? The year is 2051. Zawadi Bowman (obviously, the future is female but it still has to be as American as possible, so we’re keeping Bowman) is embarking on an Odyssey and she has the experience of . . . what? The focus of our readings is essentially on massive cooperative chatrooms – technologically facilitated places for conversation. Does Zawadi literally have the experiences of 3 or even 3,000 specialists at her neural fingertips? Perhaps she hosts the consciousnesses of a massive diverse team of highly experienced individuals in her bionically modified super-mind. Her strength and general physical rigor along with her own exceptionally varied life experiences and personal perspectives have contributed to her designation as Captain of this cloud. She can delegate subsets of her team of consciousnesses to very dexterous robots when more “hands” are needed on her vessel. The access is what matters. Her education is instantaneous and also the result of many lifetimes of experiences. Oh, and no-longer-baby-Dave is somewhere out there detonating warheads at will and floofing about as a cloud. Is this the future? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ps. Did anyone notice how WoW took heat from Carnes as essentially beer pong but its concept was widely celebrated or it was explicitly celebrated elsewhere in the readings?

Get those kids [with their technology] off my lawn

simpsonscellinclas

Lectures are boring… sometimes

Lectures (whether in-person or virtual) should present information and help students understand content by making connections between ideas, demonstrating or explaining difficult concepts, or simply presenting the information in a way that makes it easier for students to remember the information later. Lectures should highlight important concepts and synthesize information that would otherwise take students hours to find and read. However, lectures are often an ebb and flow of new information and boring redundancy.

Teachers are sometimes blamed for students distracting themselves with technology because they aren’t using teaching methods that “kids today” understand. And it may be true that some courses and instructors are unengaging and boring. However, in the regular flow of a lecture, the information receiver will likely be bored during some parts of the lecture because they already understand a concept, are confused and do not know what is happening in the lecture, or simply find the course subject boring. The presence of occasional boredom is a symptom of group learning, when an instructor is teaching to students of different backgrounds.

The problem with modern technology is that it allows the slightly-bored student to escape immediately. What may have been 60 seconds of boredom turns into 240 seconds of distraction. The threshold for distraction is lowered, because we are given instant positive feedback of being entertained by checking our electronic devices. We have now missed some portion of the lecture and are slightly lost, which is may mean that understanding the lecture is difficult. We receive the negative reinforcement that lecture is boring. We distract ourselves with technology again.

I have been a student in networked and non-networked classrooms. And over and over again, students are playing on a computer or phone. Sometimes there is no pretense- the student is watching YouTube the entire class. But often it’s not continuous- just having email or a website up, or looking up something online that is class related. But the ability to escape is a constant pull. Maybe we’re only looking at our phones for 15 minutes out of the 50 minute lecture, but we’re thinking of checking them for another 15.

PLLcell

It’s technology’s fault for [not] being there

Technology in the classroom can be distracting. And it seems to be a problem with two knee-jerk solutions: 1) Get rid of all technology or 2) Incorporate all possible technology into the classroom.

I lean towards the first response. I’m not saying that technology cannot be incorporated into a course. Various platforms allow us to instantly and easily submit assignments, provide feedback and grades, and exchange information. They allow us to engage in distance learning and online discussions. And technology can be used to engage students.

But technology in a class can facilitate distractions. Teachers shouldn’t give up on trying to keep students focused on the lecture instead of their phones and computer screens. It shouldn’t be included in a course just because it can be. Do we need to give students more-expensive electronic versions of equipment or integrate phone applications into a class?

Conversely, technology shouldn’t be used because it’s easier to facilitate and grade than in-person interactions. By replacing in-person with online discussion, words are stripped of their tone and corresponding body language. After spending time crafting the perfect blog post, might we not be a bit defensive about people questioning our ideas? Or reading someone’s post after a bad week of work may result in a negative interpretation of a neutral comment.

I enjoy writing and reading. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t write. Writing forces us look at our rambling thoughts and structure them into coherency. It allows us to pick out our best arguments and cut redundant and contradictory information. I simply question whether instead of encouraging more individual interfacing with the whole of the internet or on a virtual platform just shared with a class, we should be encouraging communication in the physical world.

1 2 3