My research into how technology is shaping our classrooms will start broadly, with a birds-eye-view of the situation as I encounter it.

Recently, I came across two (somewhat older) Youtube videos: Digital Aristotle: Thoughts on the Future of Education by CGP Grey; and This will Revolutionize Education by Veritasium. I found their content both interesting and relevant in my daily life as a student teacher. In this post, I will examine CGP Grey’s video and try to situate it within my inquiry.

You can find CGP Grey’s video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vsCAM170-M&t=3s

CGP Grey’s input matters. Not only is he a prominent Youtuber and therefore, active in new media and technologies, but he was also once a classroom teacher. He has experience on both sides of the educational technology debate and to me that is to be respected and valued.

His video begins by evaluating the role of the classroom teacher as one who communicates curriculum content at the right pace for a minority of students at any given time and he outlines how this is an inefficient and unjust approach to education. He then praises the Internet as the revolutionary tool which can provide students with the information a classroom teacher possesses, thereby making them less relevant in the education of children. With the Internet being a cheap resource for learning, it would be possible to imagine a scenario in which schools have fewer classroom teachers. CGP Grey envisions a new approach to education he calls Digital Aristotle for Everyone (DAE) – a computer program that can be personalized to the needs of each individual student, teaching them the content that would normally require the hiring of a handful of private tutors – or classroom teachers. DAE would be able to tutor students individually, test them on what they know, and provide each student with their own personalized education plan. Most importantly, it would make education more affordable. In the short term, DAE would enable teachers to freely navigate through the classroom, providing whatever assistance students may need with the program. In the long term, it would make classroom teaching near-irrelevant, as the DAE AI would know its students better than their teachers. Sounds utopian for students, doesn’t it?

So how does this opinion affect my inquiry into technology and classroom education? Simply put, if DAE is the answer, teachers will soon become relics of the past (and I made a poor career choice). The teachers left to supervise student learning through DAE wouldn’t be teachers, but something else… a something which CGP Grey doesn’t clearly address. One major issue I had with his video, was his personal view on human civilization, defined through three job types: scientists, doctors, and programmers. Where are the humanities, foods, shop, art, music, P.E., and other teachers? Going further, is the content classroom teachers teach the sum of our value as professionals? Where are the debate clubs, sports teams, drama performances, GSAs, and green clubs that promote leadership, interpersonal skills, social harmony, and environmental stewardship? Where is the humanity in CGP Grey’s view of human civilization? It would appear as though it requires no humans at all – it certainly lacks culture to say the least. Nevertheless, his critique on where classroom education is and where it is going forces us to critically examine how it is that we as a society value public education, if indeed we still do anymore.

In my next post, I will reflect on Veritasium’s This will Revolutionize Education Youtube video.

Until next time,
Alex M.

My inquiry interests haven’t changed and I plan to pursue the relationship between technology and community in the classroom. My essential question remains, How can teachers responsibly engage with new technologies to enhance their classrooms as supportive learning environments?

This area of research would greatly benefit colleagues insofar as teachers must play a prominent role in defining the role of technology in education, or risk having corporate specialists redefine 21st century education for them. There is a war being waged between those who wish to make the case that public education still matters and those who argue that new technologies provide better opportunities to engage and educate students. Jane van Galen’s article Learning in the Digital Age: Control or Connection? argues how corporations and politicians are proactive in reconciling new technologies with their educational agendas and that teachers are not given a seat at their table. Teachers must therefore acknowledge that there are special interests that, for better or worse, seek to make public education and the classroom teacher irrelevant. It is therefore up to us as professionals to be proactive in the debate on why our work still matters in the 21st century and this cannot happen until we first educate ourselves and develop new curricula and pedagogies that welcome new technologies into how we teach. It is with this spirit of engagement and determination that I forward this modest proposal to you, dear reader.

Until next time,
Alex M.

Question:
How can teachers responsibly engage with new technologies to enhance their classrooms as supportive learning environments?

Reflection:
Some of our instructors in the BEd program have emphasized the importance in acknowledging the relationship between learning and play. Therefore as teachers, we ought to be constantly re-thinking how we present new material to our students. Over the course of my short practicum, I was able to observe some of the ways in which my colleagues used technology to engage their students in classroom learning. Based on my observations, I noticed the following issues: teachers avoided risk taking in their use of technology; the school seemed ill equipped to provide both teachers and students with the resources to learn in unconventional settings; and teachers were reluctant to address the issue of student cellphone use in class, whether positively or negatively. My observations left me wondering whether or not technology has brought the classroom community closer together or farther apart.

My studies at the UBC BEd program, as well as my experiences on short practicum have led me to the following conclusions: first, that the fundamental objective of Social Studies education – to create inquiry-driven critical thinkers and socially engaged citizens – has not changed; second, human knowledge is increasing at an exponential rate – thanks to new technologies, we are consuming and producing more information than ever before. Yet we can observe that, while most of our students are consumers of these new technologies, not all have the opportunity to contribute to that pool of knowledge. This needs to change.

I want my students to critically reflect on how technology shapes learning and builds community. Education in its current form is married with new technologies and I believe that the purposes educators attribute to new technologies in their classrooms will be decisive in determining the direction of our profession in the future. Researching the relationship between technology and community in Social Studies education will benefit all humanities teachers in creating safe, playful, and supportive learning environments for students, creating inquiry-driven critical thinkers and socially engaged citizens.

Next Steps:
I could prepare a series of interview questions for teachers and students, asking them about their interests and purposes for using technology in the classroom/their daily lives. This data could help me to understand the necessary balance required in creating a safe, playful, and supportive learning environment using new technologies. I should also narrow my interest in “new technologies” towards something more specific, such as social media or virtual reality in Social Studies.

Until next time,
Alex M.