Social Context in Education

LEARNING THROUGH COLLABORATION AND SHARING 2: TECHNOLOGY-MEDIATED SOCIAL CONTEXTS

KOHN (1993) FOUND THAT ‘STUDENTS WHO ARE ENCOURAGED TO THINK ABOUT GRADES, STICKERS, OR OTHER ‘GOODIES’ BECOME LESS INCLINED TO EXPLORE IDEAS, THINK CREATIVELY, AND TAKE CHANCES. RATHER THAN REWARDS, TEACHERS WHO FOCUS ON LEARNING, THINK MORE DEEPLY ABOUT ADDRESSING THE DIVERSE NEEDS OF THEIR STUDENTS IN THEIR CLASSES, IN TERMS OF SCAFFOLDING, ENGAGEMENT CREATIVITY AND PROVISION OF INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGES THAT ENSURES LEARNER TRANSFORMATION. AS THE TABLET WAR RAGES ON, DISCUSS HOW MATURITY AND INSIGHT GAINED THROUGH TACIT KNOWLEDGE, AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE ON ILT IS IMPORTANT TO CUT THROUGH THE POLITICAL HYPE AND PREPARE ONESELF IN MAKING BEST USE OF PRACTICES IN SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE SOON AVAILABLE MLEARNING TOOLS TO ENHANCE THE LEARNING PROCESS.

Josmar Borg EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Learning has Changed? ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 Technology Integration ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Educational Shift ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 From Hype to Reality .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................................................. 10

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

2

INTRODUCTION Technology has grown rapidly in the past years and at present, as captivatingly shown by McLeod, S. et al. (2009) in the video clip ‘Did you Know 4.0’, we are living in a word which is dominated by economic, technical, cultural and social change.

As Postman, N. (1992)

acknowledged, technology imposes changes in the values, norms, communication methods and other sociological factors because “technological changes are not additive; but ecological”. A simple example would be the concept of wanting an ‘immediate response’ such as when sending a text message, we automatically expect to receive an immediate reply. In contrast, before technology changed the way we communicate, it was normal to wait for a reply after sending a letter by post. Society has not only got accustomed to and is living such a change but popular cultures are making preference of certain tools over the others, such as using FaceBook over, the usual and mostly used, Skype or MSN for chatting. This means that society is not only integrating technology but is making preference among the tools according to the culture, values and trends.

In this document the aim is to present how learning has changed and the different needs and skills that our net-generation students must acquire to reflect the demand of modern society.

This imposes a shift in the educational sector as the teaching process should reflect “...about what I do as an educator in meeting the needs of my students.” (Pettine, T., 2012). It is then noted how technological tools can be utilised in schools to support and guide the students to acquire the necessary skills. Following is an account of why “despite these opportunities, adoption of technology by schools is still anything but ubiquitous” (Kessler, S., 2010). Finally, an account of present national educational reform and propositions is given while discussing how technology can be integrated into our educational system, similar to many other countries that already are practicing such a paradigm shift.

LEARNING HAS CHANGED? The sheer quantity of information conveyed by press-mags-film-TV-radio far exceeds the quantity of information conveyed by school instruction & texts.” (McLuhan, M., 1957). As Prensky, M. (2001) stated “…our students’ brains have physically changed" and so is the way learning is done.

Traditional teaching has become outdated because our students are not anymore empty vessels to be filled with knowledge in an educational environment only. This is because technology has “destroyed the monopoly of the book as a teaching aid & cracked the very walls of the classroom”.

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

3

(McLuhan, M., 1957). As a result, “Today’s society is very contextualized, and that learning does indeed happen as much in the workforce as it does in the classroom." (McLuhan, M., 1957).

Thereby, as viewed by the sociocultural learning theory, learning takes place in a social context and so “learning need not necessarily take place only at the level of the individual, but that collaborative group work and sharing with peers (and others) can be a powerful way of confronting one’s own conceptions (pre-conceptions), contributing to the need to restructure one’s cognitive schemas.” (Taylor, J., 2003) McLeod, S (2011) stressed out that on the contrary of traditional teaching (‘teacher-centred approach’), we need an “educational approach that moves away from low-level mental work and towards stronger development in critical thinking and problem solving”. Therefore, a ‘studentcentred’ approach is more likely to render such a teaching pedagogical development. We should move away from the idea of the school being the solely learning place to schools being “an important part of the learning continuum” (Casap, J., 2013). This is very important because “Education is a social process; education is growth; education is not a preparation for life but is life itself.” (John Dewey). This is in fact the fundamental concept of mobile learning (mLearning), i.e. learning is mobile and thus it happens everywhere.

TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION Technological rise has led to the development of web based tools such as shared spaces where teachers and students can store and share information online, communication tools and social media that provides collaboration (Collaborative Learning), virtual worlds and other tools that are, nowadays, used by our student. This implies that collaborating outside school environments has become a normal procedure, and so technology can help “…teachers to expand beyond linear, text-based learning and to engage students who learn best in other ways” (Kessler, S. 2010).

It should be noted that technology in education to “broaden access to information and make learning more interactive” (Kalan, J., 2013) dates back to quite a few years ago.  1960’s: radio programs used to reach students in Australia’s outskirts  1970’s: Latin American countries used radio to broadcast lessons to rural areas  1990’s/2000: there was a push of having computer labs in schools and later came Internet Access

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

4

Following was the rise of WEB 2.0 which provided a platform were the students are ‘unshackled from the technical part’ and so their focus will only be that of expressing their own creativity, hence boosting the enhancement of the ‘ME’ (self-expression). Moreover, Web 2.0 together with social media and mobile devices instilled a sense of involvement, thus creating what is called a ‘participatory society’. Students want to be involved and engaged in their learning process and with so many tools available to them this has become even more possible. As the Chinese proverb goes, “Tell me and I forget, show me and I remember, involve me and I understand”. It is therefore crucial to understand that as Hannafin, M. J. & Land, S. M. (1997) explained, technology enhanced student-centred learning environment requires “different and new sets of learning outcomes”. Thus, “the repertoire of literacy skills, required by the young in our society is expanding” (Carrington, V., Robinson, M., 2011) and so while technology “offers powerful tools to enhance learning” (Dror, I. E., 2008), the teachers must be prepared to acknowledge such “multi modal mainstream resources that students are using at home or for social interaction... [and so] ...this requires a 'parallel pedagogy' that amalgamates the skills required for both traditional and digital resources”. (Carrington, V. & Robinson, M., 2011) The role of technology role in schools has evolved “from a contained ‘computer class’ into a versatile learning tool that could change how we demonstrate concepts, assign projects and assess progress” (Kessler, S. 2010). For instance:  “The positive effects of social networking sites in education are profound.” (HuffPost Education, 2011). Through social networking students can collaborate together and “increase technological proficiency, contribute to a greater sense of collaboration in the classroom, and build better communication skills.” (HuffPost Education, 2011). Smith, M. K. (2010) added that social network “elicits the students' participating skills, to give their share of work while shaping their ideas and values, and listening skills in order to hear others.”  The rapid hype of mobile devices can be attributed for the fact that “they have been so quickly and so seamlessly absorbed into the fabric of day-to-day life.” (Merchant, G., 2012). Mobile phones became what Hollan, J; Hutchins, E; & Kirsh, D. (2000) described as “the blind man’s cane” in which a “material object becomes the extension of the human being”. As Robson, R. (2003) stated, “now is the time for the e-learning and educational technology community to pay serious attention to mobile learning and handheld devices”. No matter if it is a tablet or a smart phone, mobile devices can have a supportive effect on the learning process and it is not only shifting the learning from ‘just in case’ to ‘just in time’ to ‘just for you’, but it is providing efficient tools that elicit the students’ learning performance. “If you have used your hand

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

5

phone to check the date and time, use the calculator and put in reminders, then you have experienced m-learning as performance support” (Terras, M. M. & Ramsay, J., 2012) We have reached a point that “integrating technology tools into the curriculum is becoming an inseparable part of good teaching.” (Pierson. M. E., 2001)

EDUCATIONAL SHIFT “We led the way in agriculture and manufacturing, now it’s time to lead again!” (McLeod, S., 2011). Similar to the shift we experienced before, will our education shift? Professor Stephen Heppell1 stated that education has always opposed technology at first but afterwards the integration of these same innovations was accepted. For instance, school policies prohibited the students of having calculators at school but later on it has become a common practice for students to have a calculator with them. So does this imply that today’s resistance of technology and mobile tools in schools would eventually turn out to be a necessity in the near future? We should realize that, as Pettine, T. (2012) explained, “If the rate of change outside an institution is faster than inside an institution that institution is in peril.”

It is quite obvious that while schools are banning devices at school, excessively filtering the internet access, and prohibiting the use of social media, students are still using them outside schools. The education is ‘powering down’ the students. This is because “on their way to school they have to leave the mainstream and powerful technology behind them because school curricula are based on static text that are developed by digital immigrants or people who are not digital at all” (Prensky, M., 2001). Thereby, while technology “…make it easier for people to wrap their information systems and social networks around themselves …” (Kacer, F., 2012), students have to change the way they do things, their learning patterns and their way of communicating. I believe that this is one of the reasons why students are failing education because according to Scott, J. (2013)2, “students are disappointed”

1http://www.heppell.net/

2

Deputy Head Teacher at the John Warner School in Herts

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

6

and if we do not realize the urgency of integrating technology in our teaching practice, we will keep on failing our students. First and foremost, teachers should understand that technology is not there to replace them. Technology has shifted the teachers’ role, from transferring knowledge to students to guiding them how to process the information gathered properly and assimilate it for future use. Therefore, teachers should realize that technology is empowering them to be flexible and creative rather than being restricted to the traditional structured way of teaching. Technological innovations should not be regarded “as tools that are used to enhance what we are doing but rather thinking of new things that we can do”. (Professor Stephen Heppell) This requires an analytic mind set. If teachers are bound to their usual teaching routine without reflecting on their daily practice, then they are limiting their own profession's growth. “Unless teachers develop the practice of critical reflection, they stay trapped in unexamined judgments, interpretations, assumptions and expectations.” (Richards, J. C., 1991). This might be one of the factors why teachers resist technology integration into education because they might not realise its necessity. Richards, J. C (1991) added that "teachers who explore their own teaching through critical reflection develop changes in attitudes and awareness which they believe can benefit their professional growth as teachers, as well as improve the kind of support they provide their students".

But resistance to change is not the only reason why education is shifting at a very low paced.

What if after reflecting about my own experience as a teacher, I wish to do something which, in reality, I cannot do due to certain outdated educational policies and rigid curriculum. On a personal level, I recognize the fact that I myself use certain innovative technologies such as:  Cloud computing like Google Drive and Drop Box for ease of data storage and retrieval,  Social networking like FaceBook to collaborate my ideas and work with my university course mates and for sharing and discussing teaching issues with my school workmates,  Smart phone with various applications installed such as Evernote for notes taking and sharing and Quora for quick information retrieval and exchange with others.

Even though that everyone is using these tools, nevertheless, schools are still banning such resources instead of empowering the teachers to guide the students into using these tools properly to facilitate both the teaching and the learning process.

On a national playing field, it seems that the inclusion of mobile devices, being tablets in our case, is at the moment a big hype. This can be contributed either due to the electoral campaign and so promises are flourishing from everywhere to attract more votes or else because an actual Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

7

need to improve our educational system is being addressed. The spontaneous question that arises is whether these tablets are going to solve our educational problems and give our students a better approach to their learning scenario.

FROM HYPE TO REALITY It is true that the integration of mobile devices into our schools will reduce the digital divide, but when contrasting the current tablet proposals with the literature mentioned above, the dilemma would be whether these mobile devices are going to be just an extra tool in the hands of the students without providing the intended benefits. In my opinion, this is exactly what is happening in the case of the introduction of the interactive white boards (IWB). Most often, the IWB are only used as a projector because as Mugliett, K. (2013) stated teachers “need to become proficient users of technology”. This is very interesting as the training should not only provide the teachers with the skills needed to use the tools but the teachers need to be trained of how and “when to assimilate appropriate technology and embed it as pedagogy” (Mugliett, K., 2013).

Thus, “the skills-based training should be complimented with subject-specific pedagogic examples”, otherwise, the money spent is wasted as the technologies would be underutilised, resulting in the same old lessons which are simply delivered in a different way.

Another aspect that should be noticed is that, most often, authorities spend large amount of money in the purchase of software and other resources which become outdated within a couple of years. Furthermore, introducing new tools when students are already using free web 2.0 tools is not a very well thoughtful plan. Today we do not have problems of outdated technology (software) because we have Web 2.0 tools which are continuously being updated and/or changed. As previously explained, these tools are already prevailing over each other by popular culture and thus it does not impose any extra effort to deal with such development. Also, it is not ideal to plan on buying expensive tools to integrate into education when other tools would deem to be great alternatives at a lesser expense, if not for free. For example, if schools become truly autonomous, then a Google Domain for every school (which is for free) would have been a very practical solution instead of the Fronter and teachers/students could also benefit from the Google apps which are always being developed and refined for a more educational outreach.

Therefore, proper planning is needed because one has to see the feasibility of such a project.

Giving tablets to everyone (students, teachers, LSA’s etc...) at once might not be an ideal strategy as this might impose various problems such as:

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

8

 How can the teacher control all this influx of tablets in the classroom?  The tablets are going to be leased to the students or given to the students. What about the technical issues?  How can we educate students about the proper use of such tools?  How can teachers cope with such a drastic change, to redesign all their plans and resources?  Would the tablets be ‘distracters’ in the hands of individuals who does not know how to use them effectively?

In reality, by giving a tablet in the hands of the students does not solve any of the educational problems we have. There should be an appropriation of the whole educational system to reflect the change in the needs of our students. That is why, there needs to be a national effort and schools should be given the right to be truly autonomous in order to develop the necessary educational programs and changes on a school basis, not on a college or on a nationwide basis.

Here is where reflective teaching comes into play as teachers can reflect on their social context and so can provide viable feedback that reflects the problems faced within their school.

The constructive planning should include all the necessary changes to be cordially implemented and not a change every so often. This way, the impact would reflect a true change indeed. This includes the need of a cultural change of how the students look towards education, where parents act as enforcers of the teachers, and teachers are treated as professionals and given more respect, especially from the authorities. Brown E. D. (2008) explained how authorities decide what changes need to be done, and then tell the professionals about it and instruct them to be prepared to deal with it. This increases the possibility of “resistance and lack of buy-in [and] usually, little or no change happens in the long run”. Our authorities have already showed such an attitude by presenting the educational reform together with their decisions and conclusions about reconstructing our schools into a college based system with mixed ability students. If these tablet proposals are going to be commenced without extensive consultation, especially with teachers who deal directly with the students, then the chances of success will be reduced.

Technology integration has already been experimented and implemented in other countries and so we should not consider this tablet proposal to be the first of its kind. It would be wise to enlighten our constructive plans to what is happening oversees. We should exploit this fact to our favour by getting feedback from these countries and reviewing how are they getting by such an implementation. While emphasizing on the positive and beneficial aspects and taking care of the drawbacks and challenges that other countries are experiencing, we should always keep in Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

9

mind that our needs might be different from those of the other countries and so the planning and design should in reality portray our situation.

It is important to keep in mind that technology can help students to acquire information and acquire further skills but it is the teacher’s task to teach the students how to apply that information in the real world, to think and learn for themselves, and help them grow as individuals. Teachers should not be afraid of technology as “no piece of technology can ever make the impact that a few of my old teachers made upon me” (Lee, J., 2012). Even though technology might impose an extra workload on the teachers, but a positive mind-set is needed in order to use technology as a supplement to teaching as this goes beyond traditional resources and “offers a more practical learning” (Kalan, J., 2013). Authorities should implement the necessary modifications, such as reducing the class population, to further incentivize the teachers to practice such an educational shift with more dedication. As McLeod, S. (2011) said “in the 21st century we must prepare our students for their future and not our past”

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

10

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bartlett, Leo. 1990. Teacher development through reflective teaching. In J.C. Richards and D. Nunan (Eds), Second Language Teacher Education (pp. 2002-214). New York: Cambridge University Press Brown, J. S., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0.

EDUCAUSE, 17-32. Retrieved [15/02/2013] from Online: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0811.pdf Brown E.D. (2008). Reasons for Resisting Change. Retrieved [18/02/2013] from http://ericbrown.com/reasons-for-resisting-change.htm Carrington, V. & Robinson, M. (2011). Digital Literacies: Social learning and Classroom Practices.

Sage Publications. (pp 1-4).

Laura, C. (2012). BAN mobiles from schools: New Ofsted chief gets tough over classroom discipline and schools could be penalised for failing to tackle disruption. Mail Online. Retrieved [21/02/2013] from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2142085/Ofsted-chief-gets-tough-classroomdiscipline-schools-penalised-failing-tackle-disruption.html#ixzz2Lp8lPmwk Dror, I. E. (2008). Technology enhanced learning: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Pragmatics and Cognition, 16 (2) 215 - 223. Retrieved [11/02/2013] from Online: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/id/CT%20technology%20learning%20good%20bad%20ugly.pdf Facer, K. (2012): Taking the 21st century seriously: young people, education and socio-technical future. Oxford Review of Education, 38:1, 97-113 Hannafin, M. J. & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science 25: 167–202. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Netherlands Hollan, J., Hutchins, E. & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human computer interaction research. ACM: Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7, 2, 141–173. In Merchant, G (2012). Mobile practices in everyday life: Popular digital technologies and schooling revisited. British Journal of Educational Technology Vol43 No 5.

HuffPost Education (2011). Social Networking In Schools: Educators Debate The Merits Of Technology In Classrooms. Retrieved [15/02/2013] from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/27/social-networking-schools_n_840911.html

Casap, J. (2013). Unleashing the power of the Web in Education. Work Seminar at BETT Fair 2013, London. (http://www.jcasap.com/) Kalan, J. (2013). eLimu: ‘T' is for tablet computer. BBC Future. Retrieved [23/02/2013] from: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20130205-t-is-for-tablet-computer Kessler, S (2010). 8 Ways Technology Is Improving Education. Retrieved [20/02/2013] from: http://mashable.com/2010/11/22/technology-in-education/ Lee, J. (2012). Technology in Education: Why do teachers resist using technology in their classrooms? Quora.com. Retrieved [20/02/2013] from: http://www.quora.com/Technology-inEducation/Why-do-teachers-resist-using-technology-in-their-classrooms Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment

Learning through Collaboration and Sharing 2: Technology-Mediated Social Contexts

11

McLuhan, M (1957). Classrooms without 2 Walls. Explorations, #7. Retrieved [11/02/2013] from: http://tcpd.org/Thornburg/Handouts/McLuhan.pdf McLeod, S. et. al. (2009). Did you know 4.0.Retrieved [23/02/2013] from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ILQrUrEWe8 McLeod, Scott (2011). Iowa, Did you Know? Online: Retrieved [24/02/2013] from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1JyLYphevc Mugliett, K. (2013). Tablets’ Effective Use. The Times of Malta: 5th Feb, 2013.

Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., &Sharples, M. (2004). Literature Review in Mobile Technologies and Learning. NESTA Futurelab Report 11 Bristol, UK: NESTA Futurelab. Retrieved [12/02/13] from: http://www.nestafuturelab.org/research/reviews/reviews_11_and12/11_01.htm.

Pettine, T (2012). Social Media and Education. Retrieved [22/02/2013] from: http://www.coetail.com/tpettine/social-media-education/ Pettine, T (2012). Technology is not Additive; it’s Ecological. Retrieved [22/02/2013] from: http://www.coetail.com/tpettine/2012/03/01/technology-is-not-additive-its-ecological/ Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413-430. In Arnold, K. (2006).

Reflective Practice: Implications of New Technologies in the Classroom Today. EDUC 6661 Exploring New Technologies. Walden University.

Postman, N (1992). Five Things We Need to Know About Technological Change. Retrieved [19/02/2013] from

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Neil_Postman:_Five_Things_We_Need_to_Know_About_Technolo gical_Change Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon: MCB University Press, Vol. 9 No. 5) PROdait (Professional Development for Academics Involved in Teaching). Retrieved [15/02/2013] from: http://www.prodait.org/reflection.php Richards, J. C. (1991). Towards Reflective Teaching. Retrieved [15/02/2013] from http://www.tttjournal.co.uk Robson, R. (2003). Mobile Learning and Handheld Devices in the Classroom. Eduworks Corporation, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. Smith, M. K. (2001). David A. Kolb on experiential learning. The encyclopaedia of informal education. Retrieved [18/02/2013] from: http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-explrn.htm Taylor, J. (2003). Pedagogy in the mobile learning environment. The Open University. Retrieved [15/02/2013] from: http://kn.open.ac.uk/public/getfile.cfm?documentfileid=2684

Terras, M. M. & Ramsay, J. (2012). The five central psychological challenges facing effective mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 43 No 5 820–832

Josmar Borg

EDU5648 Assignment