T+-+sections

T - Are the new information and communication tools acting as drivers to determine pedagogy? Is this a desirable state. George Siemens writes, "... Forget blogs...think open dialogue. Forget wikis...think collaboration. Forget podcasts...think democracy of voice. Forget RSS/aggregation...think personal networks. Forget any of the tools...and think instead of the fundamental restructuring of how knowledge is created, disseminated, shared, and validated." In this, is he advocating a particular pedagogy? Should institutions advocate a particular pedagogical approach?

We develop and invent new technology to progress. Let us consider technologies used for written recording of meeting minutes: shorthand on paper, the typewriter, the electric typewriter, the computer, the portable computer. Each of these technologies made written recording easier. Some would argue that the recorders' skill decreased, since the technology compensated for speed, or errors in spelling, for example. This outlook focuses on the past, and what is likely to be lost through a period of change.

Some would argue that by automating skills that are no longer of primary importance, written recording may move forward in new ways. This outlook focuses on the unknown and what could be done better through a period of change. Kasworm and Londoner comment on change triggered by technology by highlighting that "[t]echnology  has emerged as a significant organizer of our lives and in the ways we obtain and exchange knowledge, ideas, and even attitudes and values" (Kasworm and Londoner, 2000, p.224). New technology provides us with space to explore something new, by automating tasks that we had to focus on in the past. The change also makes us re-evaluate ideas and attitudes.

Has written recording itself changed? Isn't the recorder always focused on recording what is being communicated during a meeting in a meaningful and accurate manner, no matter what technology they use? Are there strategies that can help the recorder to achieve his or her goal?

Taking this parallel to teaching and learning, our goal is to provide students with best possible learning and understanding of a subject, so that they can succeed in their vocations and lives. What George Siemens emphasizes in his connectivism writings is that sometimes we focus on new technology alone, and associate this new technology with discomfort that we may feel about the changing environment that this new technology triggered. We should shift our focus to concepts which the new technology opens and allows. Or, we could focus on the concepts that we may be losing with the advent of a new technology - both are very valid points, and the necessary contrasting sides of change and of understanding change. The technology itself, however, is only an inanimate object, a tool.

As accurate and meaningful meeting minutes are the desired outcome for a recorder, student success is an objective of pedagogical approaches in teaching and learning. Accommodating a variety of learning styles, or using tools that students are accustomed to and are comfortable using are only a couple of factors that must be considered. Knowing learning preferences of different age demographics is also important, because it changes the ways that educators need to explain concepts to achieve student learning and understanding; our world is not static. In conclusion, I would argue that the societal change that is triggered by new technology needs to reflect in pedagogical approaches, else our communication of concepts would be outdated.

---

Richardson (2006) has found that, “… by their very structure, blogs facilitate what I think is a new form of genre that could be called ‘connective writing,’ a form that forces those who do it to read carefully and critically, that demands clarity and cogency in its construction, that is done for a wide audience…” (p. 29). Secondly, and most importantly, a blog enables an organized and shareable space that is also searchable, it provides an efficient and accessible platform.

George Siemens references ‘participative pedagogy’ as the term to denote the process of allowing students’ ownership of their learning. He presents connectivism as a theory of learning that can bridge the rift between traditional and new educational approaches to prepare learners for the tomorrow they will inherit. Connectivism provides insight into learning skills and tasks needed for learners to flourish in a digital era. It’s primarily a theory about learning that draws on network theory, social networking, and social constructivism. A great deal of consideration is given to evaluating context in Connectivist learning theory. In his University of Manitoba wiki, Siemens (2007) contends that, Evaluating context requires consideration of numerous elements and environments, which influence both design, and delivery of a particular learning task, activity, or program… [e]ssentially, in instructional design, we need to make two substantial changes: 1. Stop seeing learning design as a task that occurs in advance of the intended learning, and begin to see it as a part of the learning process itself 2. Begin to focus more on the context of learning (designing environments of learning) and less so on the intended content of the learning activities (course, workshop, or program)

Jeffries' blog (2006) provides interesting debate on the Death of Handwriting. Penmanship seems on the decline but argues that handwriting will survive because it is needed even with texting gadgets, keyboards, and automatic voice-to-text devices coming out on a daily basis. We still struggle to teach learners to do math the long way even with calculators and gadgets readily available.

Jeffries, S. (2006) Retrieved Oct 17, 2009. http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2006/feb/14/art --reference list format needs confirmation if used-