Artifacts:
Reflection:
My choice to include the media production (MP), LYOTARD’S REASONING from ETEC 531, Cultural and New Media Studies, is based on its relevance to my overarching goal of online PD. This video addresses the importance of diversity in knowledge and the importance of technology use to either stifle or progress the diversity of ideas and knowledge in the world. In reflection, I see its application going beyond culture and science, addressed in the video, to also include interest-based communities like Shared Lessons (SL) that aim to expand teacher’s professional knowledge.
Going into this project I had many influencing factors that affected the planning and implementation of this project. These factors mainly included the course readings from ETEC 521 (Indigeneity, Technology, and Education), Haraway’s (1991) Manifesto of a Cyborg, and Lyotard’s (1986) The post-modern condition: A report on knowledge. In Haraway’s writings, she discusses boundaries between man and technology in relation to other boundaries in society and how these boundaries often over simplify, delineated and confine people to neat categories that prize efficiency and control over truth and freedoms. At the same time, Lyotard was teaching me that diversity of ideas and freedom to express our perspectives freely in the world was essential for the evolution of knowledge and the survival of humans. As I was taking this all in, I was also studying Indigenous societies and their effort to gain power and influence over their own affairs and within the world. Like Haraway’s feminists efforts to gain a voice and shed the hegemonic control of the dominant masculine society, Indigenous societies are also fighting to shed the mantle of marginalization and colonization as they turn to technology to provide them with a voice and further their legitimization in society.
With all of these sources of information mixing together during the planning and implementation of the project, I focused on the importance of using technology to create diversity of culture in the mainstream Euro-American dominant internet environment. At the time, I didn’t consider the projects connection to my overarching goal of online professional development (PD), particularly SL. However, in reflection, I realize that, like the expression of many cultures and ideas, the internet, especially in the form of professional communities, provides the opportunity for teachers to express a multitude of perspectives, cultural practices and beliefs and ideas about teaching and learning. Within these communities, teachers are able to democratically, socially and experientially negotiate their meaning. Where formally teachers have been restricted to PD that has preached mainstream practices and theories, we can now share our own individual perspectives and ideas on best practices within a social interest-based platform.
Congruent to plight of Haraway’s feminists and Indigenous people, teachers have also been marginalized, to a lesser degree, by a set of hegemonic constraints and boundaries that have kept us tied to traditional practices imbued upon us by our educational training and our grade school experiences. Up until this point, we have had few opportunities to revolutionize our knowledge. Even further, our current and dominant PD methods mimic our experiences in university and instil little or no accountability on the instructor/presenter to guarantee practical applications with attainable results. Yet, administrators, government, and some teachers, push other teachers to apply practices like KAGAN strategies and project based learning without: proper teacher training, opportunities to discuss difficult issues with peers or instructors, ability to negotiate expectations or curriculum, and knowledge, motivation and/or confidence to pull it off. This puts teachers at a serious disadvantage that I don’t believe has been challenged in the history of education, as we accept our circumstances and the power structures that keep us bound to traditional roles. As the BC government, in their WORKING TOGETHER FOR STUDENTS PROPOSAL, brings in new directives to make education more constructivist and problem based, they fail to change a curriculum that makes this style of teaching impossible. It has been suggested, by Japanese teachers, that western curriculum is too varied and expansive to successfully practice problem based learning (Heibert and Stigler, 1999). In fact, many of my colleagues, who are currently applying this method, have to sacrifice 20% of the curriculum to reasonably apply this practice to just one unit of study. Yet, we tolerate and accept these terms and keep persisting despite feeling alone, unsupported, and deficient.
Dori: Wouldn’t it just be easier if we could have one code, one best way to teach, rather than discussing and negotiating all of these different perspectives and ways of doing things. Really, it doesn’t seem very efficient.
Well Dori, you make a valuable point, but there are serious repercussions to becoming overly specialized, even if one believed in a perfect way to teach. As humans, we have so many different perspectives that it’s hard to get us to all agree on anything. And as I summarize in my MP on Lyotard’s reasoning below, diversity leads to continued viability, which is a good thing.
Lyotard’s Reasoning MP Summary:
Many forms of technology can act as instruments of suppression, these include radio, newspaper, and TV, in which citizens are bombarded with the views of the powerful minority that shape the mainstream opinion. Lyotard cautions that such regulation can create boundaries and limits that devalue the little narratives (yours and mine) and can restrict the types of knowledge being produced. With less variety comes fewer ways to adapt to changes in our environment. However, times are changing and democratic uses of certain technology, such as blogs, wikis, communities of practice, and other websites, enable individuals or specialised groups of people to create communication networks in which they can develop their own narratives free from the sanctions of administrations or “experts”. These many little narratives provide the backbone for a variety of future ideas, growth and developments that will enable us to adapt and evolve.
And you are right, efficiency is a definite concern. With so many voices, how will a society run? Will governments dissolve into anarchy as people reject traditional power structures in preference of their own ideas and beliefs? Or is it possible that technology may work to create mechanistic efficiency in which decisions are made by consensus rather than allowing interest-based groups or individuals to have their own autonomy? In many ways, this threatens diversity and potentially leads to a melting pot of ideas and cultures from around the world.
In fact, this is a concern that I have considered with SL. As I realign this MP with my overarching goal of online PD, I question whether the platform I am constructing will create diversity and increased knowledge or if it will tend toward consensus and the adoption of a “best” practice. My bias in my MP is obvious, although I can only philosophize as to the potential benefits or perils of both paths. At this point, I reflect back on the article, “Should you invest in the long tail?” from ETEC 522, which speaks to the choices of the masses and how we are drawn to popular productions despite the varied choices of movies and music available to us (Elberse, 2008). In fact, the long tail, or more alternative, less mainstream choices, are often appreciated mainly by individuals who watch or listen to a lot of movies and music. In this case, we understand that diversity is important, but that certain selections will likely attract the majority, often due to issues of quality, style, aesthetics, or popular qualities that certain productions will possess that are not consistent in the long tail. Although diversity and popularity seem to be ideas at odds with each other, I understand that many alternative perspectives will not fit within mainstream’s contexts. For instance, lessons or strategies that are more practical or less time consuming are predictably going to be more popular than other more laborious techniques, no matter what the perceived benefit. This relates to how SL attempts to fit both functions, in that it will allow a diverse record of teachers’ ideas but also allow teachers to organize them based on various criteria that they share with others. This gives teachers the ability to explore alternative methods but also organize and review knowledge together. For, as important as diversity and long term viability are to teaching, it is equally important that teachers discuss, negotiate and are aware of what works, for whom, why, potential pitfalls and benefits, reliability, etc. These are all aspects can be achieved in a medium like SL, that enables ideas to be posted, liked, followed, repined to personal boards and discussed.
Within many PD websites, standard lists of blue links keep each resource pristine and untouched by social dialogue or measurements of popularity. This requires each teacher to derive all this experiential and relevant information for themselves without the help of their peers. In our busy world, where time and energy are finite, such a laborious activity seems far from efficient or practical. It seems wasteful not to amass our efforts for the benefit of all and help each other find direction in a profession full of new resources, initiatives, and technology. Diversity is essential, but people also want the benefit of endorsed resources and ideas from other teachers that share their interests, style, grade level, etc., making the search for relevant ideas and solutions much easier.
In many ways, valuing diversity of perspectives and community cooperation ties in to the ETEC 511, Foundations of Educational Technology, essay on SMARTboards. In this essay, I discuss Friere’s (2007) philosophy that technology should humanize and bring people together rather than inform, control or stifle their freedoms. This speaks to the idea of democracy which allows each of us a voice in a shared purpose. For, instead of websites that teach and sell different resources and programs, every teacher deserves a voice in a democratic discussion on teaching and learning. Websites like SL, that create a community of practice, provide an opportunity for dialogue and negotiation of ideas and understanding that humanizes rather than dictates conditions and rules of PD and teaching. An example of the pitfalls of traditional PD was a story told to me by a colleague. She had accepted an opportunity to have a Kagan facilitator watch her class and give her assistance on her progress using this strategy. Instead of making her feel a part of the process and negotiating their understanding together, she was informed that she wasn’t doing it correctly. Unfortunately, many of our PD methods are built upon these hegemonic and controlling structures that leave teachers feeling empty and repressed.
Finally, in my last MP, THE COPYRIGHT DEBATE in ETEC 531, I dealt with issues and questions pertaining to the democracy and ethics of copyright and the present push towards more stringent laws around the world. In this changing internet world, I see grave implications for the sharing of personal resources and other copyright material. Many of these present laws and the current political climate, may inhibit the ability for communities of practice like SL to share each other’s ideas, or to incorporate or improve upon others work in ongoing PD. Although the new Bill C-11 has improved the rights of educators to use copyright material in their schools or in online courses, it does not improve the situation for online sharing of professional work or other resources amongst teachers. Although SL is technically a district run website, it is not private to the institution and would not be protected unless locked from public access. At this point, if a teacher shares a project or activity, and another re-posts or alters it in any way, they have infringed upon the rights of the creator and owner of that intellectual property. However, as I point out in my MP, this kind of copyright infringement is almost impossible to police and rarely justifies legal recourse for monetary damages. In essence, the copyright laws still remain broad but unenforceable. However, this may not stop the government from shutting down SL if people complain about their work being used or remixed. At this point, we may need to consider other options like controlling access to the site through institutional walls.
Both media productions confirmed and challenged different beliefs and practices that pertain to online PD, as well as the potential and difficulties that face the present Web 2.0 and future Web 3.0 world.
References:
Elberse, A. (2008). Should you invest in the long tail?. Harvard Business Review, 86(7/8), 88-96. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Haraway, D. (1991). A cyborg manifesto: Science, technology, and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, New York: Routledge, 149-181. Retrieved from http://www.egs.edu/faculty/donna-haraway/articles/donna-haraway-a-cyborg-manifesto/
Kahn, R. & Kellner, D. (2007). Paulo Freire and Ivan Illich: technology, politics and the reconstruction of education. Policy Futures in Education, 5(4), 431-448. doi:10.2304/pfie.2007.5.4.431
Lyotard, J – F. (1986). The post-modern condition: A report on knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. New York: Free Press.
Follow
Leave a Reply