At seventeen, I was editor of my high school newspaper. I was dissatisfied with a number of things: the mediocre learning atmosphere of my high school, the cut-and-dried teaching methods, and the teachers who, for lack a better word, just weren’t up to speed. Other students felt similarly, but there wasn’t much we could do about it, even though we were the principal stakeholders in the educational process. I decided to write an editorial calling for change. In the editorial, I criticized the faculty for failing to deliver engaging learning activities in the classroom. I pointed out that the student body was largely apathetic. We listened to boring lectures, received rote assignments, went through the motions of completing them unenthusiastically, and received minimal feedback that came much too late. I asked a disturbing question, “What would teachers do without their answer keys?”
I drew an editorial cartoon to reinforce my point. In the drawing, a stork hovered over a chimney with a newborn baby in its beak. The chimney was labeled “faculty,” and on the baby’s diaper were the words: “New teaching methods.” The caption read: “The stork delivers a long overdue baby.”
All hell broke loose. Teachers were in an uproar. The high school football coach delivered a scathing lecture in the locker room in which he told me it was unthinkable I should criticize my teachers. He suggested to the school principal that my parents be notified, followed by disciplinary action, including suspension from school. I listened without saying a word. Later, I discussed the issue with Mrs. G., the supervising faculty member in charge of the student newspaper. She was totally supportive. She reassured me that I had every right to voice my opinion in an editorial. Freedom of speech was a constitutional right. The word soon went out that if any of the teachers wished to confront me, they would first have to wrestle with Mrs. G. A few teachers suggested that the writing in the editorial was too advanced for a junior and that obviously, I had “borrowed” the words from somewhere else. But they were all my own, and they came from a place that knew there was a better way. In time, the storm in a teacup abated. I was not suspended, but teaching methods remained unchanged.
Throughout college, the same teaching methods used in high school prevailed. I listened to lectures delivered by my professors, studied, and hoped to retain as much material as possible so I could do well on quizzes and exams. More than forty years later, learner-center teaching methods are still under discussion. Advances have been made in biology, cognitive science, and neuroscience concerning how individuals learn. Theories and ideas about effective instructional practice are abundant. Yet learning-centered teaching still requires advocates, such as Terry Doyle in his book Learner-Centered Teaching: Putting the Research on Learning into Practice (2011). Critical thinking, problem solving, effective communication, and contributing to a team, among other key competencies, are essential to success in most careers. Enrollment in online courses is still burgeoning, and in their 2013 report, Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States, Allen and Seaman reported that the number of students taking at least one online course was “at all-time high of 32.0 percent” (p. 4). Digital technologies hold the potential for transforming educational practices.
But is all the evidence in? Will digital technologies alone improve the educational system? Is the acquisition of digital technologies the “better way”?
References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. The Babson Research Group and Quohog Research Group, LLC. Retrieved from http/www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf
Doyle, T. (2011). Learner-centered teaching. Putting the research on learning into practice. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
priming the mind 
Justin,
As wonderful as the emerging technologies are, I do not believe that technology alone can improve education. As we learned this semester (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2012), it is the content that is delivered, and the activities incorporated, that will improve education. The technology used needs to match the learning objectives and the teaching methods. Using technology just for the sake of using it does nothing to enhance learning, and may end up just confusing the students. On the other hand, using technology if and when appropriate enhances and improves education and the learning experience.
Dawn
References
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
LikeLike
Dawn,
Thank you for your observation. I totally concur that not only teachers, but also policymakers, need to use discernment when selecting technology in education. Since the 1970s, we’ve been hearing that technology will transform the education system, but empirical evidence is still lacking. Technology is accelerating at such a rate that it’s hard for policymakers to know what to invest in. That is why Fullan and Donnelly (2013) developed the index in Alive in the Swamp. Fullan and Donnelly suggested that the index can be used to guide policymakers and entrepreneurs in maximizing the integration of technology, pedagogy, and systemness. What it means to be a learner in the 21st century, according to Fullan, follows this equation: Well-educated = E(K + T + L)
E = equals the ethical educated person
K = stands for knowledge
T = for thinking or thought
L = for leadership
Reference
Fullan, M., & Donnelly, K. (2013) Alive in the swamp. Assessing digital innovations in education. NESTA. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org/uk/sites/default/files/alive_in_the_swamp.pdf
LikeLike
Hi Justin,
What a sad commentary on the schooling you had. I am so glad that you had Mrs. G.! I was much more fortunate is that I was in schools that experimented with different teaching techniques and, as I moved into middle and high school, asked the students what seemed to work best for us. I find technology intimidating, although I am learning to use it better. Student centered learning relies mostly on the student being willing to do the work, even when the teaching is presented in the teacher-centered format. However, the best and brightest teachers are the ones who engage the student’s desire to learn and then facilitate the process (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2012).
Molly
References
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
LikeLike
Molly,
You are very fortunate to have attended a school in which different teaching techniques were tried and where your opinion mattered.
I went to middle school and high school in the 60s in a conservative city in the Deep South (it shall remain nameless). At that time, education was still deeply in the throes of teacher-centered learning, and as students, we had no input into anything. Even our civil rights were not respected. When I was in the 7th grade, in an obligatory class for males called a “woodworking shop,” which was simply a study hall, the teacher started lecturing us on picking up trash on the school grounds. We were sitting at tables on stools, and I started reading a book I’d brought to the study hall. Suddenly, a felt a metal object hit my leg. The instructor had thrown a wrench at me because he said I wasn’t listening to him. (In retrospect, I wish I had brought a lawsuit against the school). But I was only 13, and I was deeply embarrassed for myself and for the teacher. I did not tell my parents.
Only Mrs. G. truly engaged us in learning. She encouraged our creativity and allowed us to write in many different genres and styles. We were actively engaged the whole time we were in her classes, as she knew how to draw on the prevailing zeitgeist to hold our attention. She was able to reach us in ways that no other teacher could. In many ways, we felt she was the only one who had our best interests at heart. And we respected her highly. Yes, the best teachers are facilitators, activators, and change agents. They allow us to ride the crest of whatever wave is “out there.” They give us free rein to experiment, to make mistakes, and to believe in ourselves.
LikeLike
Justin and Dawn:
My husband taught technology in elementary education for four years in California and Phoenix. We have had numerous conversations regarding the use of technology in educational settings. I think some educators are gravitating towards technology because they believe it will improve student outcomes. Svinicki and McKeachie (2014) suggest examining course goals to effectively utilize technology in teaching. Educators should consider the skills and knowledge they desire students to acquire at the conclusion of the term. In addition, they should consider which teaching strategies to use to facilitate the achievement of established learning objectives. After clarifying this information, instructors can choose appropriate technologies and learning activities for their classroom environment. Svinicki and McKeachie (2014) also recommend selecting technology in accordance with Bloom’s taxonomy of objectives. For example, to record and remember information (lower level cognition), using Microsoft PowerPoint is good method for delivering clear readable outlines to students.
I enjoyed reading your blog! Thank you for sharing your knowledge and personal experiences.
Kimberly
Reference:
Svinicki, M.D., & McKeachie, W.J. (2014). McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (14th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
LikeLike
KImberly,
Thank you for your comments.
The comprehensive index developed by Fullan and Donnelly in Alive in the Swamp (2013) can be used by educators or policymakers to evaluate new companies that produce technology, along with their products and school models. Color-coded score cards are used in the Innovation Index:
Green: Good – likely to succeed and produce transformative outcomes
Amber Green: Mixed – some aspects are solid; a few aspects are lacking in full potential
Amber Red: Problematic – requires substantial attention; some portions are gaps and need
improvement
Red: Off track – unlikely to succeed
Criteria are then provided for pedagogy and technology. It’s a very practical guide that educators can use to “predict the transformative power of emerging digital innovations” (Fullan & Donnelly, 2013, p. 13).
Fullan, M., & Donnelly, K. (2013) Alive in the swamp. Assessing digital innovations in education. NESTA. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org/uk/sites/default/files/alive_in_the_swamp.pdf
LikeLike