iPadogogy, Portfolios and iSense?

Slowly, sluggishly, another academic year draws towards its end. A year of bridges, a year of learning, a year of questioning. A year which leaves me with no e-portfolios to go through.

Some may find that a relief; personally, I find it a pity.

It is never too soon to have learners begin their e-portfolio, in particular when working within an iPadology framework. The question of e-portfolios has been widely accepted but where is the practice?

Let’s begin by considering an iPadology framework where students have a possible iBook and a selection of apps to work with. It is with the apps that students create their presentations, whether those be with Haiku, Keynote or digital stories with PuppetPal or any other app appropriate for story-telling. Students may present their work to the whole class or neatly submit it to the teacher through a LMS or cloud. Either way, this approach is parallel to when students wrote only for the teacher’s eyes – a practice I have always rejected. In an age where digital literacies are needed to be fostered and developed, producing only for the teacher’s eyes makes even less sense to me.

Which begs the question, if students are encouraged to use apps for creating stories, movies and other tasks, why must these creative productions be hidden in a cloud?

Let me take a step back for a moment – what are these digital literacies which are so bantered about? If literacy may be understood as  “a set of social and cultural practices that involve the interpretation, production and communication of shared meanings. Literacy implies the ability to make sense and to create meaning, as well as an understanding that doing so is a social practice that draws on an array of complex, interwoven social, cultural and historical contexts” (Payton & Hague 2010), then digital literacies are all of the above but with the addition of digital tools.

These digital tools help build new knowledges, changing how students learn and develop knowledge. Belshaw (2011) points out how there may not be a complete agreement among some regarding the precise definition digital literacies, yet highlights how there are 8 main elements to take into consideration:

If these literacies are to be included in a learner’s experience, if a learner is encouraged to bring his/her life experiences to their learning experiences, then their work needs to be visible.

This visibility serves different purposes as well. On the one hand, it is a show-case of the learner’s work and progress throughout an academic year or course. On the other hand, by being able to display, share, comment and improve, the individual learns.

It comes as no surprise that I believe blogs to be the best medium for a student’s portfolio. While there may be a whole industry willing to sell e-portfolios to educational institutions, again, these are far from my preferences. Why should a student leave their work locked up, far from the real world, in an institution’s system? Where is the purpose? (Where is the openness?) It is not only the need for one’s portfolio to be accessible anywhere, at anytime – it is a question of ownership. A learner’s portfolio belongs to him/her, reflecting their progress, learning and achievements.  Even if a system is mobile, the learner’s portfolio will still be tucked away, visible to teacher and possibly peers. Possibly.

More than tools developed for digital curation and storage, for example LiveBinders, blogs are easy to use, easy to share and students are left with a visible trace of their progress. As Downes  (2004) explains, “What makes blogs so attractive, in both the educational community and the Internet at large, is their ease of use. A blog owner can edit or update a new entry without worrying about page formats or HTML syntax. Sebastian Fiedler, a media pedagogy specialist at the University of Augsburg in Germany, has been monitoring the rise of blogs for a number of years. “Many lightweight, cost-efficient systems and tools have emerged in the personal Webpublishing realm,” he writes. “These tools offer a new and powerful toolkit for the support of collaborative and individual learning that adheres to the patterns of contemporary information-intensive work and learning outside of formal educational settings.”

Downes (2004) also discusses the value and pitfalls of blogging, adding that “Despite obvious appearances, blogging isn’t really about writing at all; that’s just the end point of the process, the outcome that occurs more or less naturally if everything else has been done right. Blogging is about, first, reading. But more important, it is about reading what is of interest to you: your culture, your community, your ideas. And it is about engaging with the content and with the authors of what you have read—reflecting, criticizing, questioning, reacting. If a student has nothing to blog about, it is not because he or she has nothing to write about or has a boring life. It is because the student has not yet stretched out to the larger world, has not yet learned to meaningfully engage in a community. For blogging in education to be a success, this first must be embraced and encouraged.”

Students are learning. It is through practice, by being given opportunities to create, develop and display their work that an iPadology (for instance) adds to what I would call “iSense“.  By keeping a portfolio, students are able to go back, reflect, while at the same, go forward with their learning while developing their digital literacies – literacies which for me,  also include other skills such as digital citizenship, being aware of one’s digital footprint and a degree of transparency in the learning process. Luca, (2011) who neatly points out 5 reasons supporting why students should blog, also stresses how students’ world view changes when blogging – a learning experience which one would hope exists in education.

I cannot perceive learning as an end, despite there being objectives for every course. Learning is a process, one that needs to be encouraged and supported. The focus on the learner, offering individualisation and catering to different learning needs and styles,  only makes sense when giving learners a chance to develop a project with tools which best meet the project and their learning styles.  To have students develop a blog as their portfolio, only enhances the “iSense” which is necessary in today’s environment of digital literacies.

Lastly, a word on change.

It has happened. It is happening. Change in our world, change in our daily learning and practices.

And no, it won’t be turning back so soon.

NOTE:

Please note that I have purposefully referred to E-Portfolios as portfolios. Just as E-learning is a part of learning, electronic portfolios may be considered part of portfolios, especially as the introduction and practice of digital education is increasingly a common feature in many parts of the world.

References

12 Important Trends in the EPortfolio Industry

Downes, S., 2004, Educational Blogging

Luca, J., 2011, 5 Reasons Why our Students are Writing Blogs and Creating ePorfolios

Payton, S. & C. Hague, 2010, Digital Literacy – Professional Development Resource

Further Reading

Couros, G., 2013, 5 Reasons Your Students Should Blog

Lampinen, M., 2013, Blogging in the 21st Century Classroom

Rosenthal,S., 2011, Learning abut Blogs for Your Students – Part II Writing

Waters, S., 2011, Getting More Out of Student Blogging

Advertisements

Beyond the Gloss of Educational Change

Yes. You have been there. The children are scrubbed clean, their uniform shirt has been ironed and their broken, shoddy footwear is kept well out of site.

Yes. You have been there. The new building which is an eye-sore on the urban landscape, the sparkling clean windows, the corridors barren of dirt and laughter.

Yes. You too have been there. The newly installed wi-fi, the brand new digital devices, the staff breathlessly dashing from lessons to training sessions, only to slump in the car park with relief that another wasted day is over.

And that is precisely one of the central issues at moments of profound change: the outer gloss.

Gloss comes in 3 main categories as well.

Category 1 – We have invested in new computers/iPads/computer labs! See how we shine for you…..

Category 2 – We provide professional training to our staff! See how we shine for you…..

Category 3- We are on par with leading institutions because we support change in Education. See how we shine for you…..

However, the shining is superficial, the gloss is thin and easily cracked.

In order for real change to occur, one needs to work constantly beyond the gloss, beyond the rhetoric, beyond the shining exterior. Agendas of change need to begin within the participants for there to be any positive effect. If teachers themselves do not feel the need for change, no amount of imposed professional training will alter their perceptions. If students are not shown how digital learning does enable them to become better learners, better students, no amount of digital investment will change their perceptions.

Having been (and currently am) a participant of change within educational systems that I work in and contribute to, the attachment to glossy smoke and mirrors is, in my view, one of the major stumbling blocks to effective change.

That is not to say that I favour dropping all digital initiatives and thus risk even further gaps of skills and knowledge. By no means would that solve any problem in education.

What I am saying, is that the need for change, the need for all players to acknowledge the need for change, takes time and must come from within an institution and its participants. There may be national educational agendas, regional agendas or even local agendas. None will be effective if the need does not stem from within. When participants are able to contribute to the agenda of change, to tailor it to their context and needs, that is when the process of change begins in full bloom. That is the moment walking unknown roads becomes a pleasure, an urgency and meaningful.

Just as the iPad brings no alchemy of success to classrooms without an iPadology to accompany it, introducing digital change from above without internalizing change to begin with, will not bring about success.

Educators cannot be lingering and waiting for professional development to come to them any longer. Educators need to be willing to have initiative, to practice and develop their interests and skills. Step by step – just as so many educators will tell their students. Educators need to internalize and  acknowledge change. From there, they are able to assist learners, many who still struggle with using digital environments and tools for learning.

There is no time to fear failing.

The only fear is being stuck in gloss.

What’s your choice?

 

Further references:

Heick, T. 2012, 5 Secrets for Smarter Education Technology Integration

Jeffery, B., 2013, iPads, A Tool, Not Alchemy, For Education

Vander Ark, T., 2013, Good Work: Tapping the Dark Matter

Edu-Gadgetry

If communication does not happen in a vacuum, neither does magic. As many know, iPads have become one of the most recent panacea to the many woes in education. From primary education to higher education, iPads are being introduced in classrooms. What do they fulfill?

Undoubtedly, iPads are powerful – with that added appeal of sexy cutting-edge and user-friendliness.  However, will their implementation achieve the same high results at all stages of education? Having been teaching with iPads for the last months, there are questions which have not been completely answered – yet.

For instance:

How do students perceive learning with iPads? Can an iPad really take the place of a laptop, in particular at higher education where students must write longer essays and not only the 5-paragraph essay for an IELTS exam?

There is so much rich learning from iPads that to dismiss them entirely is neither constructive nor beneficial to anyone, especially learners. What needs to be understood is that they will not magically increase learner engagement if learners are not themselves motivated to learn, nor can they be used in the same way in all educational contexts.

Petocz & Manuguerra (2011) claim that iPads have been used to “as a means to engage, inspire and motivate students through high-level presentation and communication tools.” They also add how It has changed the pedagogical approach, making the learning experience simpler and yet deeper. Results show that students learn best when technologies are seamlessly integrated into the curriculum to enhance their learning experience.”

Yes, there are apps which do add that extra appeal and glitter, however they are not essential for a high-level presentation nor as a communication tool. There are plenty of those online – and free to users. Often what I see is merely a more attractive re-packaging of a presentation rather than deep learning. My other query is up to which point are digital technologies really being seamlessly integrated into the curriculum when assessment is still based on paper and pen exams? Where lies the enhancement? With all the discussions and claims to enhancing motivation and learning, dare I ask – where is this learning? And once again, is the focus of iPadology more on the tool or on what the tool can achieve in terms of learning? Is the increased engagement all about the tool and apps, or in fact about the quality of learning?

Personally I believe that learning today is more mobile than ever; mobility shapes us with the aid of digital technology. Mlearning  (which I use to define mobile learning for the sake of clarity) will hopefully bring educational benefits to the many who have not had access to education.  Mlearning is a benefit to myself as well. My iPad is always by my side, all I need is WiFi to reach out to the world and learn.

Nevertheless….

However…

Is the implementation of iPads (and a required iPadology) sufficient to improve learning in educational environments? And if, doesn’t there need to be a differentiation among the educational levels and environments in order that the use of the tool better fits the needs and demands of learners?

Momentarily I linger…

I question as each day unfurls further questions. Education has to be more than gadgetry – though those will not go away any day soon.

Between the shoreline of Web 1.0, Web 2.0, heading towards Web 3.0, is where you will find me.

References:

Heick, T., 2013, 8 Characteristics of Education 3.0

Petocz, P. & M.Manuguerra, 2011, Promoting Student Engagement by Integrating New Technology into Tertiary Education

Have To, Want To, Need To – Recipe for Change?

If one is to accept that the song of life is accomplished on the strings of change, then my  life has been a tribute to change, ingrained in me, written on the body and practiced with sunrise.

From geographical changes, landscapes and seascapes, west to east, east to west, there are few spaces in between where change was not written in capital letters. As an educator, I have weathered both the lull before the storm of change as well as the satisfactions and frustrations that changes bring.

Change is a celebration, a gift of life.

Or Is it?

As I reflect on the changes sweeping across the USA in regard to the Common Core State Standards, I can’t help thinking that these objectives have always been part of the curricula that I have taught (in other contexts, other places). Nevertheless, the urgency that these same objectives are applied to all levels of education, have never been greater.

Two particular points are most relevant to higher education: the emphasis of life skills across the curriculum and accountability. It is not enough to claim that higher education is to prepare students for the workforce – very often it does not. Ivory towers still remain aloof, wrapped in delusions that technological advances are for others. Responsibility is much more than merely arriving to class on time and following a required syllabus.  Life does not happen in a vacuum, much less learning. Learning is inter-woven, regardless of subject or topic. Links are not merely hyper or digital, but factual and real. Ensuring that this transparency of inter-connectivity in learning, is in my view, necessary for every classroom, for in every context and age level, students need to make abstract and intellectual connections of knowledge.

Ignoring the connectivity that open learning brings us today, is ignoring the many changes taking place in the world of education today. Change does not occur in isolation nor do only academic articles published in journals, bring about change. Change is the practice, the implementation, the belief of change. And there are many who to reach out to.

Is there anyone who is possibly reading this now and can truthfully claim that they experience, they witness no change around them? More: can anyone truthfully say that there is no support available? As a curator I daily come across article after article, offering ideas and suggestions for implementing change, whether in companies, professional training or in education.  I think it is time to assert that only those who ignore change may state that there is no support; all it takes is will power and a click to open the windows of the many who share, reflect and practice change. They are no outsiders to their world of knowledge nor rebels without a cause. Practicing educators will often offer practical advice.

Where does this leave me in regard to change in education?

In the space visualized above, (taken from Learning Attitudes to #eLearning), where needs merge and inter-twine. I have previously mentioned the role of learners’ motivation; the chart above is a reminder how change is not only for learners but for all, especially those in the field of education – teachers, leaders, administrators.

Godin, reminds readers that,

Before changing the signal and thus assuming that this will change the outlook, it probably makes sense to understand what will change the causes of someone’s perception and habits, and use the signal as a way of figuring out who needs to be taught.”

In other words, it is not enough though to introduce change without all participants and stake-holders understanding the reason for change – major stake-holders such as learners need to be aware of the role of change, why and how it will affect them. Initiatives such as the introduction of iPadology will not become effective without learners understanding why such shifts are being practiced in their classrooms.

Change

and

connections

are written on the body.

Of all.

References:

D’Antoni, S. 2013, A World Map of Open Education Resources Initiatives

Godin, S., 2013, Signal and Causes

Hopkins, D., 2012, Learning Attitudes to #eLearning

Mak, J., 2013, Who are Changing the World of Education and Learning?

Murray, J., 7 Ways Common Core Will Change Your Classroom

Stacey, P. 2013, Open Access

Embracing the Chaos of iPadology – Part 3

I sought bridges and found none.

I sought coherence and was left with chaos. At times, there is no choice but to embrace chaos, to accept the dynamics and life within a sphere of chaotic movement. I regarded fractuals and their apparent order, quietly acknowledging how fractual my  practices in the classroom had become. Is this where teaching practices were heading towards? A fractual of lessons  where chaos reigned?

Murphy (2011) refers to Katherine Hayles, when reflecting on elements of chaos in an instructional designer‘s practices:

Chaos theory . . . can be generally understood as the study of complex systems, in which nonlinear problems . . . are considered in their own right, rather than as inconvenient deviations from linearity. Within chaos theory, two general emphases exist. In the first, chaos is seen as order’s precursor and partner, rather than as its opposite. The focus here is on the spontaneous emergence of self-organization from chaos. . . .

The second branch emphasizes the hidden order that exists within chaotic systems. Chaos in this usage is distinct from true randomness, because it can be shown to contain deeply encoded structures called “strange attractors.” Whereas truly random systems show no discernible pattern when they are mapped into phase space, chaotic systems contract to a confined region and trace complex patterns within it. The discovery that chaos possesses deep structures of order is all the more remarkable because of the wide range of systems that demonstrate this behavior. . . . The strange-attractor branch differs from the order-out-of-chaos paradigm in its attention to systems that remain chaotic. For them the focus is on the orderly descent into chaos rather than on the organized structures that emerge from chaos.” (Hayles, 1990, pp. 9–10)

While I was quite comfortable with the varying rhythms of students working on their laptops, the introduction of iPads in my practices forced me to look into chaos and the organised structures which may emerge. I began by considering what could be done with an iPad:

The iPad is much more than a mere toy which gave access to digital games; it is also much more than only a device to create engaging presentations; it gives learners practice and develops skills which they will need in their lives beyond the school’s gate. The argument against this is,  whether adopting iPads is really necessary as there already is a wealth of digital tools online which provide free practice for the above skills. However, that was a thought, a reflection; the refute, being how data access has become mobile and that this has affected education as well. Nevertheless,  my main concern was how to find a balance between my teaching beliefs and practices and iPads in the classroom.

The moment came when I tried a different approach.

As usual, I wrote up the date and day of week on the upper hand corner of the whiteboard. As students came into the classroom, there was the regular  pre-lesson interaction, greetings and questions. Then, instead of having the whole class focus on the same task at the same time, I explained that they were to complete the tasks on the board within the time of their lesson. I quickly wrote up the tasks which needed to be done, from tasks in their course iBook to the use of apps to complete project work.

Silence. Stares. Silence.

 Then a wave of energy ensued. And chaos reigned.

If I was reluctant to have students enclosed in their individual bubble, working quietly, individually with their iPad, I was wrong.

As I went around the classroom, observing them, students were working together, solving exercises, collaborating with each other. Some worked alone then checked with a partner. Others decided to go straight for their project work and compared their work with those students who were also focusing on that task, comparing what they had achieved with their choice of Apps. (I had given a range of Apps for them to choose from).

The energy was catchy and my teacher trainee was equally surprised at how autonomous they had become. Yes, there was a certain degree of noise as students called out for each other. Yes, I was kept busy as individual students had different questions. The 2 hour lesson went by in a flash; all tasks had been accomplished. At the end of the lesson, I exchanged views with my trainee; after all, her opinions as an observer and a speaker of L1, were relevant. What I found out surprised me – students had been focused on their tasks throughout the entire lesson. What appeared to me as chaos, was in fact students talking about task problems and how best to solve them. Instead of being distracted with  games and private texting, they spent the whole lesson focused and being productive.

There had been no isolation. Collaboration ruled within the apparent chaos.

From apparent fractuals and chaos, I had found the bridge I so needed. Perhaps this lesson had been characteristic of a certain group of learners, at a certain point in time. They certainly had had experience with using their interactive iBook; they already had had experience using a range of Apps for carrying out assignments. What I had not expected was their autonomy in achieving all tasks. I, in turn, was able to assist more individually, giving specific support and clarification to each individual. The iPad, with its ease of mobility in the classroom, allowed everyone to work at their own pace and easily collaborate with whom they wanted to – not only with the person sitting next to them.

Ideally, I wish that all my lessons had the flow and energy that this particular one had. But that would be like wishing for a perfect world, not taking into account students’ moods, concerns, and other features which influence a lesson. My quest remains: at every step I wish to use the iPad as a 1:1 teaching device, I want my students to collaborate, solve problems, create, and above all, learn.

iPads still frustrate me with their lack of Flash and Java; iPads are certainly not for word-processing but offer users the possibility to blog and write and even print from them.

iPadology? A welcoming world of streamlined fractuals and chaos, from where new practices of learning arise.

References:

Bloom’s Taxonomy Re-imagine & Digital Blooms: different ways to approach learning

Gleeson, M., 2012, The iPad, What it should and shouldn’t be for Education

Holland, B., 2012, What Students Can Actually DO with an iPad (Edudemic)

Kulowiec, G., 2012, iPads are like Hammers (Edudemic)

Murphy, D., 2011, Chaos Rules, Revisited in IRRODL, Vol 12, No 7 (2011)

Embracing the Chaos of iPadology – Part 2

In the space between chaos and shape there was another chance.

Jeanette Winterson

What is it about that chaos that attracts me?

The underlying order it establishes, the order that waits patiently to be deciphered. Perhaps. Nevertheless, if I am to pin point a “strategy”, a new approach in my classroom, then it is with wonder and respect that I say it is the perfection of apparent chaos flowing as students engage and produce at their own rhythm.

But first let me admit – as each day I watched my students sit with their iPads in front of me, I wondered: are we (educators, administrators, politicians) confusing content and learning with a device? Is this device actually delivering quality learning or quality technology? I struggled to understand. For this was a mobile device, not one where students sat in classroom rows. This was a device to consume and create content but …. where was the learning if it was the teacher who was obliged to create? Hungry for answers, all I came across was the cliche mantra: challenge-based lessons!

My lessons have always been a challenge. Not only do I teach a 2nd/3rd language to many of my students, I come from a different educational paradigm which challenges most of their educational experience. So how exactly was the iPad to add to the challenge – other than the challenge of finding activities which would actually work on it (i.e. the lack of flash which does not enable learners to engage in the many online activities available). Above all, how, as an educator, was I to ensure good teaching practices with the iPad? Furthermore, most of what I came across regarding iPadology, was in the context of K12. I teach at higher education. Where were the bridges I needed for my students?

This brings me to Mishra and Koelher (2006) who  explain how,

“Quality teaching requires developing a nuanced understanding of the complex relationships between technology, content and pedagogy, and using this understanding to develop appropriate context-specific strategies and representations.”

If one considers the three components mentioned above (technology, content and pedagogy), there is bound to be points of tension between them at different moments in time. Today, and for example, in my case of using iPads as a learning device, I often feel that “it is the technology that drives the kinds of decisions that we make about content and pedagogy” (Mishra & Koelher 2006). Couros (2012), in an article referring to the use of social media, highlights how educators need to use the web with its 2.0 technology and not the more passive 1.0 approach. With the use of iPads in the classroom, educators have little choice but to follow this sound advice.

So where were the bridges I had to create? How was the implementation of iPadology to be effective? Far from attempting to create a new pedagogical theory, I sought a framework of practice. For “having a framework goes beyond merely identifying problems with current approaches; it offers new ways of looking at and perceiving phenomena and offers information on which to base sound, pragmatic decision making.” (Mishar & Koelher, 2006)

In order to begin establishing some kind of road map, some possible framework of practice, I considered the different contributions on App evaluations for the classroom. Below is Silvia Rosenthal Tolisano’s considerations on content and components logistics based on the SAMR model of learning.

All nicely put and visually pleasing, yet it is the framework of my daily practice that I inquire into. Could there be a road map in the apparent chaos and pedagogical tensions I perceived? Would I be capable of carrying out my pedagogical beliefs (so well summarised by Couros, 2013) with a mobile device and a set syllabus to cover?

In between the chaos and the space. Chances of learning practices loom.

References

Couros, G., 2012, Don’t use 2.0 Technology in a 1.0 Way

Couros, G., 2013, 8 Things to Look for in Today’s Classroom

Mishra, P., Koelher, M.J., 2006 – Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge

Ruben R. Puentedura’s Weblog – Ongoing Thoughts on Education and Technology

Schrock, K. , 2011, Evaluation Rubric for iPod/iPad Apps

Embracing the Chaos of iPadology – Part 1

Throughout this past semester, I tried, (often in vain), to create bridges for myself. Being accustomed to working with a computer and having students likewise work on their laptops, I had the urgent need to hold on to what I knew – digital tools which would enable learners to express themselves more creatively, digital tools which would add value to their learning of digital literacies. Above all, the use of online tools and activities which would engage learners in their learning process.

With the iPad, I was often left in despair – any site or task which demanded flash, would not work  on the iPad. Activities done with Glogster, for example, had to be left to the time slot in the computer lab as students complained how the iPad screen was too small for them to comfortably create digital posters. The world of iPadology had become a jungle with too many apps and too little effective outcomes.

1x.comphoto28743As I read papers, blogs and opinions of others, more experienced than myself with iPad teaching, more questions than answers began formulating:

1 – With so much focus on technology, where was the focus on teaching? Where was the focus on learning – other than with games which didn’t really develop deep learning? Was higher education going to be finally turned into one enormous nursery room in the name of Apps?

2 – Wasn’t the role of the teacher to actually teach?  With the increase of administrative loadings, assessment, teachers today are also expected to create iBooks and design other pedagogical materials with new digital devices – yet the discourse most commonly encountered is how it is important to let students themselves develop materials. I find this clash of discourse and expectations an added burden to teachers, who are already juggling so many extra tasks. Where exactly lies the balance?

In between digital devices, digital tools, digital beliefs, I found myself questioning. Digital technology is not a replacement of teaching. Teaching involves much more than the use of digital tools.

In regard to my first question, having students accept that their iPad was more than a trendy device to edit images, took time. They had to learn how to use a particular set of Apps, such as Edmodo, Popplet and others. Their learning had to include coming to class with their iPad charged, updating Apps and other necessities which working with iPads demands. As in many other learning processes, the first step was one of new habits and new attitudes to responsibility.

Personally, I had to adapt as well. I had to now consider learning tasks which the iPad would allow.  There are many Apps which I could recommend, but this is not the place. However, one example springs to mind: Haiku. Besides Keynotes, Haiku has become a favourite among my students; without their direct awareness, Haiku requires that the presenter speaks to the audience while showing images; for me, this was note-worthy progress from deadening presentations filled with bullet points which were merely read. I mention this example as a very positive outcome from using Apps for presentations in class. There are other Apps, such as Word Mover, which engaged my students with language and which, after having created their poems, we sat on the floor and listened to each poem with smiles of understanding.

Would my students have achieved the same outcomes without the Apps mentioned above?

Yes.

Regrettably, digital technology does not equal good pedagogy.

In fact, digital technology requires good pedagogy, for without sound pedagogy coming first and foremost, a lot of digital practices found online will fall into rote learning which was done on paper not so long ago. For me, using digital technology in the classroom is exciting  and a pleasure – as long as it can inspire learners to create, organize their thinking, enable them to learn and practice skills which will be useful in the workplace.

Philey, (2012) points out that:

“We like to say that teaching has changed, but I’d like to argue that it hasn’t. Teachers still have the same major tasks today as they did before the Internet. Two hundred years ago, teachers still:
Collaborated with students and other staff
Communicated with students and parents
Found and shared resources
Managed student behavior
Delivered direct content
Built rich, performance-based assessments”

This happened before digital technology played such a major role in classrooms and  it still does today. However, with the digital tools available today, many of the processes have changed. DropBox and LiveBinders, for instance, become resources which can be shared and accessed anytime, anywhere. Yet the fundamentals of good teaching are still ingrained in these practices. Even in classrooms where iPads are being used, there needs to be consistency in pedagogic practices for every context.

In every new paradigm shift, there is bound to be elements of chaos. Kathy Shcrock’s (2012) visual of how Bloom’s taxonomy is put into practice today, reflects how Apps may be used, and possibly what an iPad classroom may look like:

8178269_origIt is in the inter-action of the above wheels, in the how and why that chaos may seem to be integral to iPadology. Apps offer much more than games; as one can see above, the creativity wheel is practically central to iPadology  – and creativity also implies problem solving and critical thinking.

As for my second question regarding the role of teachers: as in other contexts without iPads, a teacher plays out a number of roles in the classroom. Within an iPadology, it appears to me, that one of the central tasks is to have learners create learning materials. This implies that tasks are appropriate for the level and goals students need to achieve. There are marked differences between learning at primary, secondary and higher education, each having its own set of goals and outcomes. Is the educator now going to teach tech or the subject matter at hand?

Where lies the balance?

Can balance be achieved within chaos?

References:

Schrock, K., 2012, Bloomin’ Apps, Kathy Schrock’s Guide to Everything

Piley, A., 2012, Let’s Stop Talking About Teaching with Tech