Ivory Tower Under Attack
The iconography piece struck my fancy, though I am not sure why, and I am still pondering the connection to the main topic. It reminded me of my regret at not buying when I had the chance an old dictionary of Egyptian hieroglyphs I saw once at the Westside Bookstore. I was thinking while I struggled with the 'text' that a Rosetta Stone (the real one) would be helpful, one that would unlock the mystery of the less blatantly obvious pictograms. To mentally compare the form and content, the experience of reading Ancient Egyptian, with the form, the content, the reading itself in the face of a text built from the mundane and mind-numbing icons of quotidian existence--is not unlike the intrusion of the ubiquitous commercial language program that even succeeds in invading our consciousness when we tread the sacred space of Antiquity. The exercise was certainly like school inasmuch as the intellectual exercise yielded truth. But to range the text itself among canonical classroom texts would be farfetched. Or maybe not so much: it's really the lowest hanging of fruit.
This has felt like a siege. One where signage and gaming and everything we associate with our everyday use of technology are crowding the ramparts of academia from without like so many throngs of relentless and mindless zombies.
Because I love nothing better in this world than to complain, I am tempted to bemoan my loss of time sitting at school of all places endlessly trying to master simple software functions, when I could be using that precious time doing something like studying ancient hieroglyphs. Hegel wrote something to the effect that mental mastery implies implies proportionate mental slavery or servitude, which is an insight that has engendered a lot more discussion than doctrine, but which leads me to wonder to what extent mastering technology is serving me in fact and my students, or ultimately monopoly capitalism.
Certainly a (mundane) truth arising from all this is that my objective of getting technology in the classroom under control so that I do not waste precious time and resources is warranted and paramount. The less mundane issue is exactly how to implement it. Tom Ward's great lecture put a fine point on that. It seems that the utility of the Angry Birds lesson was more psychological than intellectual. The fact that it is a commercial video game connects it to our topic, but the very mixed success of its application to a mathematical question points to the permanence of the academic ramparts. In the end, my sense is that game-like activities have been used in the classroom effectively for eons and will continue to be used, and that we have learned a valuable lesson in ZPD in this unit, but that more than ever teachers must be mindful and instructive on the issue of factual knowledge and intellectual skill versus the content-poor mental gymnastics of virtuality.
I definitely agree with you that it is common for teachers to try so hard to bring technology into their classrooms that the relationship between technology and content is weak and thus meaningless. Further, I think it is pointless for us to use technology in our classrooms if we do not have a specific reason. If the technology, be it video games or portfolios, does not offer MORE to our students than a lesson without technology, I don't really see the point.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I do see some uses for the inclusion of games like Angry Birds. For instance, bringing Angry Birds into the classroom served to bridge the gap between math and the students' everyday lives and interests. We've talked a lot about the importance of making content relevant to students in order to increase their motivation and learning. Similarly, relating new things (in this case math) to prior knowledge (Angry Birds) can help students remember and recall information.
I'm curious: If you were to consider these factors in regards to the Angry Birds lesson, would you change your mind at all about the teacher's use of it in math class? Have you already considered them and still come to your conclusion?
I think you are totally right about relating the subject matter to the students' interests, be it video games or what have you. What I didn't really make clear is that the gap between video games and classroom learning appears far from being closed, but that as things develop, we might someday see McGonigal's vision becoming reality as learning and gaming coalesce. I envision foreign language acquisition becoming almost instantaneous if it were as fun and engaging as a good video game. The mind can perform wonders--when it wants to. I guess that might sound a bit contradictory, given my rant, but the issue itself is fraught with countervailing considerations and realities. In short, I am as *conflicted* about it as many others.
DeleteI find it interesting that books, which are the medium of learning before the great technology boom, seem to resonate more with you than the technology of our children. One of my son's devours books and cannot get enough, but lately he has been slowing down with them. I asked him why, expecting he had not had a chance to get to the bookstore or the library, and instead was a bit shocked. He had been introduced to reading books on an Ereader and actually preferred that option instead of the books we had been buying for him several at a time. Add to that his grandmother's personal library, thousands of books and I was even more shocked. He has had books all his life but now, he preferred to read them in electronic form.
ReplyDeleteThe next generations are not the same as us. They do things differently and technology is a major part of their lives. Going forward, technology will be an even larger part of their lives and there is nothing we can do to stop that from happening. I have books on my Ipad, big books and little books, not to mention many books. I would need a big box to carry them from here to there, but with my Ipad, they are all there and easy to handle. So the point of my writing is we really do not know if a simple video game may or may not be a catalyst for some great discovery. I have seen my kids methodically playing games, trying to figure out what their next step was going to be, or how to stop something from happening. I have seen whole stories unfold and their imagination captured for hours at a time, and me with them as well. Is there only one way to solve a problem? I don't think so...IBM thought the mouse was useless with computers when it was first discovered...We should ever discount any way to teach, you never know where the idea might end up…
If you have not read Carrie's blog from the Woodrow Wilson Conference, I would recommend. She too bemoans poor technology use, and rightly so.
ReplyDeleteI also "feel you" on feeling like everything in academia is being assaulted by technology and this idea that everything needs to be "friendly" to the student.
I believe there is a balance to using techniques (including technology) to help students learn new things by using things that are familiar to them (like Angry Birds) and forcing students OUT of their comfort zone (GASP!) and into a demanding world of intellectual thinking, reasoning, and discussion.
Like I said, it is a balance...both sides are needed in equal parts on an individual level for the student...in that brilliant ZPD range we discussed this week.
One more comment....I am glad you are in my group. Brilliant, eloquent writing. Really enjoy it.
ReplyDelete