One of the most troubling narratives that I have noticed, even amongst teachers, is the idea that teachers/academics "reject" any attempts to incorporate new technologies into their teaching. Although there are some individuals that are unfamiliar with new technologies and do not feel comfortable using them, I think the reasons why many choose not to engage in networked learning and networked literacy is much more complicated than reverting to the: "they are lazy," "archaic" or "they simply don't care" diatribe.
Within high school, in particular, what I found was a "crowded curriculum," where there was a seemingly never-ending sea of content that needed to be delivered, and some students would even protest when asked to actively engage in an on-line capacity, even to the degree of asking to return to paper and pencil. Some posited that having "everything online" caused them to not be able to "give excuses" for not having completing the work. The issues with technology within the schools I worked was also a daily issue, with laptop and connectivity issues. There were frequent problems with student laptops, to the degree that in each lesson there would be at least five students with some issue that prevented them accessing the materials. These all relate to systemic issues rather than individual faults.
Within high school, in particular, what I found was a "crowded curriculum," where there was a seemingly never-ending sea of content that needed to be delivered, and some students would even protest when asked to actively engage in an on-line capacity, even to the degree of asking to return to paper and pencil. Some posited that having "everything online" caused them to not be able to "give excuses" for not having completing the work. The issues with technology within the schools I worked was also a daily issue, with laptop and connectivity issues. There were frequent problems with student laptops, to the degree that in each lesson there would be at least five students with some issue that prevented them accessing the materials. These all relate to systemic issues rather than individual faults.
The "Threshold concept framework" by Kligyte (2009) that provides a "useful lens for academics," regardless of their setting, to explain "why it has been so difficult to inspire" teachers to "embrace" new technologies into their teaching and learning practice suffers from one fundamental flaw. It does not illustrate the aforementioned issues that I have experienced. It outlines how networked learning can seem to be "troublesome, discursive, irreversible, liminality and integrative" by teachers but does not highlight the other factors that can hinder the integration. However, I am talking from a high school setting perspective and the paper is based on the university setting where I did not experience the same issues. As a university lecturer I just found LMS to be clunky and outdated.
I'm definitely not saying that I disagree that each of the thresholds are not happening as I can see that they are very much a reality for teachers, regardless of what age group they are teaching. I have seen teachers talk about how the new technologies can seem "alien," "counter-intuitive" or " incoherent." I have also seen many embrace the technologies because they believe them to be "irreversible," as I do, something that cannot be "unlearned" and will "inevitably" lead to improved teaching and learning practices. However, I think where I see teachers mostly sitting within the framework is in the "liminality" threshold, "shifting back and forth," some even hoping that it will "go away" or they will "retire" and not have to worry about it, but many feeling impacted by the issues I previously mentioned, so they either do not act at all or try their darnedest to incorporate it.
I have recently worked with a student who is completing his PhD in technology integration within schools. Through using the TPACK model he is exploring how the model can help teachers and students experience the benefits of using new technologies in their teaching and learning. What is good is that his proposal, at this stage, does not focus solely on teachers as being the issue and does take a systemic view. After to getting to know this student and his cultural background, I have learnt that teachers are highly respected in his country. There is a lot of understanding of why technologies are not begin integrated from a systemic level. What I have found in the Australian context is that there is an alarming discourse that seems to target teachers as being the reason why technology is not integrated effectively within schools, or even seem to condemn teachers as being too ignorant of the new technologies, or even of "good" teaching itself.
What the experience made me wonder though was whether accountants, lawyers, doctors and all the other professions would engage in this type of behaviour. They may, but it is not my experience to say. What my experiences do make me wonder is why would a profession, that is all about learning and becoming the best person you can be, revert to making others in the same profession appear ignorant and "lazy." Does this not contribute to the denigrating of a profession, a profession that I went into because I believed, and still do, that it is all about nurturing human potential. A recent article published in The Atlantic online called Why Do Americans Love to Blame Teachers? illustrates my point. Although a North American example it highlights the same issues that I think is happening in Australia and other similar cultures. The article illustrates the "good teacher/bad teacher dichotomy," where an entire profession is painted as full of "lazy" and "stubborn" teachers.
A recent post by Tracey, "Blame, boundaries and 'hating teachers'" reveals how I am not alone in recognising this phenomenon. Tracey writes that there is a "popular tendency to make teachers accountable for 'all things,'" including "many things that are beyond their control." I agree, as it is not only the myriad of day-to-day events but also the integration of technology that is certainly, and often times, out of their control.
I have recently worked with a student who is completing his PhD in technology integration within schools. Through using the TPACK model he is exploring how the model can help teachers and students experience the benefits of using new technologies in their teaching and learning. What is good is that his proposal, at this stage, does not focus solely on teachers as being the issue and does take a systemic view. After to getting to know this student and his cultural background, I have learnt that teachers are highly respected in his country. There is a lot of understanding of why technologies are not begin integrated from a systemic level. What I have found in the Australian context is that there is an alarming discourse that seems to target teachers as being the reason why technology is not integrated effectively within schools, or even seem to condemn teachers as being too ignorant of the new technologies, or even of "good" teaching itself.
What the experience made me wonder though was whether accountants, lawyers, doctors and all the other professions would engage in this type of behaviour. They may, but it is not my experience to say. What my experiences do make me wonder is why would a profession, that is all about learning and becoming the best person you can be, revert to making others in the same profession appear ignorant and "lazy." Does this not contribute to the denigrating of a profession, a profession that I went into because I believed, and still do, that it is all about nurturing human potential. A recent article published in The Atlantic online called Why Do Americans Love to Blame Teachers? illustrates my point. Although a North American example it highlights the same issues that I think is happening in Australia and other similar cultures. The article illustrates the "good teacher/bad teacher dichotomy," where an entire profession is painted as full of "lazy" and "stubborn" teachers.
A recent post by Tracey, "Blame, boundaries and 'hating teachers'" reveals how I am not alone in recognising this phenomenon. Tracey writes that there is a "popular tendency to make teachers accountable for 'all things,'" including "many things that are beyond their control." I agree, as it is not only the myriad of day-to-day events but also the integration of technology that is certainly, and often times, out of their control.
What I think is dangerous is reverting to the blame game, where teachers, in my opinion, are often the scapegoat, blamed for what is a much more complex issue. What I do know is that teachers are facing a "new ontological (nature of reality) destination" that will "transform the way learning is understood [and] teaching is practiced." This will take some resistance, as Dave Snowden explains is due to "peoples perceptions and memories of the past." But, as with all change, there will always be resistance, particularly when individuals become disempowered by prevailing dogma.
References:
Kligyte, G. (2009). Threshold concept: A lens for examining networked learning. In Proceedings of the Ascilite 2009 Conference (pp. 540–542). Auckland, NZ.
No comments:
Post a Comment