KEYWORD- Digital Learners

In examination the nature of our children who are in school, they students are different. There are drastic changes in their approach to teaching and learning. These students grew up in a technological advance world and so technology became a part of their daily routine. Often times these students are referred to as the ‘N (net)-gen or the D (for digital)-gen” (Prensky, 2001).  Digital learners refer to individuals who are deeply grounded in new technology and possess highly developed technological skills.  Their lives are surrounded by technological gadgets such as computers, videogames, digital music players, cellular telephones, and all other tools of the digital age. These learners do not just use the available technology for learning in the classroom. Rather, they make use of their personal digital devices in the teaching and learning environment.

Digital learners are surrounded by a technological enriched environment. The skills and interest of the digital learners are shaped by their immediate environment. This environment allows the learners to become virtual learners rather than digital learners. Their skills are provides the opportunities trained by virtue of being in an environment which is technological enriched. Due to their exposure in the technological environment, digital learners process information differently. They process information in a random access manner.

The main characteristics of the digital learners are experiential, connected, multitasking, immediate, experiential and social/interactive. As an experiential learner, the student takes control of his/her own learning experiences.  The student monitors and controls his/her learning, becoming very active in the learning process.

Digital tools provide digital learners with acceptable social outlets. These learners create and build networks and desire both information and socialization. In building this community of learners, the digital learners can build new knowledge.

The digital learners are capable of using more than one medium at a time. This process is referred to as Multitasking. Very often the digital learners are engaged in several instant messaging conservations at the same time. For example they are using MSN messenger and they are also signed in to Skype. The multitasking abilities of the digital learners have is due to the limited attention span of the learner.

__________________________________________________________

Philosophy of ET

What is the purpose of educational technology or technology in education?

The purpose of educational technology can be equated to how the term is defined. Education technology according to Januszewski (2001) is (a) a field, (b), a broad range of learning resources, (c) individualized and personal learning. From the definition there is no one purpose of educational technology. Rather the purpose depends on who is the user. I will examine the purpose of educational technology to the students and the teachers.

Educational technology, when used appropriately will help the students to absorb information in a more meaningful way. With educational technology students will be able to access information in a format suitable for their learning style. The students will also be better equipped to continue their learning outside the four walls of the classroom. That is, learners are able to access information anytime and anywhere. Educational technology enables learners to be responsible for their own learning.

With the use of educational technology, the teaching practices of teachers may be altered drastically. The aim of these changes should be to enhance the teaching and learning process. This may be accomplished by using a Learning Management System or by placing course syllabi on a website or on Power Point slides.

What do you value in education and technology?

Education is important to the development and sustainability of well-rounded individuals who are able to achieve their full potentials. It is my belief that education can break barriers to upward mobility. Education can prepare students for the true world, not necessarily to pass an examination. Education (formal or informal) acts as the medium between man and his world. An educated individual knows how to collect information and how to process it. Through education

the critically thinking skills of individuals are harnessed. Learners are more aware of their surroundings and are better able to question issues as they arise.

Technology has the capability to bring out the best in individuals. When use effectively in the teaching and learning environment, technology can provide both teachers and students with opportunities to learn and grow. Technology provides greater student engagement. With technology students are better able to search through information, and discover important concepts during the process.

My theory of teaching about, through, for, from and with/against technology is rooted in a learner centred approach, specifically constructivism. The active creation of knowledge and the meaningful interpretation through experimentation by students are pinnacles to the teaching and learning process. This can be achieved when technology is the nucleus to the teaching and learning process.

My theory is built on the development of higher order thinking skills such as synthesis, analysis, and evaluation. Teaching about technology (content), through technology (processes and skills), for technology (occupations and roles), and, from and with/against technology (addressing profound aspects) blends with my theory of teaching, constructivism.  It allows students to, actively participate in the learning process, solve real-world problems and understand the fundamentals of the topic while building learning communities.

__________________________________________________________

Digital Immigrants: Are pre service teachers prepared to use digital technology as a learning tool?

Background

In this paper I will examine the technology preparation of pre service teachers in a teacher training institution which is situated in urban Jamaica. In Jamaica, the term ‘pre service teachers’ is used to describe students who are pursuing a three year teaching diploma in a teacher training institution. Students who are at least 17 years of age (once they have matriculated) are eligible for entry in these institutions.

Today’s pre service teachers are different from any generation before them. They have more access to technology in their homes and institutions when compared to earlier generations. Their exposure to technology started from an early age. It began with the computer and then the internet. Their technological world soon expanded to include devices such as cell phone, iPod, and Mp3 players. There is no doubt, that their exposures to digital technology have earned them titles such as digital natives (Prensky, 2001a) and N-Geners (Tapscott, 2004).  These terms are used to differentiate the age differences between the learners, their parents and teachers.

Pre service teachers are native speakers of the digital language. They process information in a random access manner. In addition, they multitask, have a preference to have graphics prior to text, and perform at their best when they network (Prensky, 2001). Prensky describes the action of the digital natives as instantaneous. They receive and give information immediate. The pre service teachers who are digital natives have an inquisitive mind. The constantly search for information and welcome instantaneous reply. They are not mere observers. Rather, they participate, “discuss, argue, play, shop, critique, investigate, ridicule, fantasize, seek, and perform,” (Tapscott, 2004, p.3).

There is an urgent need for teachers to incorporate the use of digital technology in their teaching and learning episodes. In recent times, this initiative has received little support from teachers. Teachers often complain of their inability to integrate technology in their classes. In a survey which was conducted in the United States of American by the United States Congress and the Office of Technology Assessment (1995), it was reported that pre-service and in-service teachers felt ill-prepared to utilize technology in their classrooms. This they attribute to the limited exposure received during their pre service years.

Prensky (2001a) and the Office of Technology Assessment (1995) contributed the poor or non use of technology by teachers in their classes to the age of the teachers. According to Prensky and Tapscott (2004), persons who do not use digital technology were born in the television era. Prensky labeled them digital immigrants. Digital immigrants have very little appreciation for new skills. They struggle to speak the language of the digital natives. Digital natives on the other hand were born after 1980. They are active users of technology. Can the digital native (pre service) teachers effectively and efficiently use digital technology as a teaching tool? 

Pre service Teacher Education

The demand for the use of technology in teaching and learning has intensified. The use of technology in teaching and learning is widely researched. These researches have indicated that the most important link to the successful use of technology in teaching and learning is teacher preparation. To this end, stakeholders in the education sector have equipped schools with digital technological devices such as scanners, digital cameras, computers, in what is referred to as the eLearning Jamaica Project. The eLearning Jamaica project will also provide training in basic computer technology and the use of technology in teaching and learning to teachers in secondary schools and the faculty in teacher training institutions.

The Joint Board of Teacher Education (JBTE), the quality assurance arm of the teacher training institutions, has included in its curriculum two technology related courses. The courses are (a) Instructional Technology, Media, and Methods and (b) Computers, Tools, and Multimedia. The main goal of these courses is to prepare pre-service teachers to use technology as a learning tool. The course Instructional Technology Media and Method is offered in semester two to year two pre-service teachers, while Computers, Tools, and Multimedia is offered in semester one to year three pre-service teachers. For semester two the duration of the course is 30 hours while in semester one there are 45 hours. There are questions, however, about the effectiveness of the technology courses that are offered by the teacher training institutions.  According to Gibson (2002), the technology courses that are offered in teacher training institutions are not helpful in getting pre-service teachers ready to use technology in teaching and learning.

There is a gap between what pre service teachers are taught about technology and what we expect them to do with technology in their classrooms (Pope, Hare, and Howard, 2002). Pre service teachers’ ability to successfully integrate technology in their teaching learning episode is severely hampered by a sense of incompetence (Marra, Howland, Weidman, and Diggs, 2003). Moursund (1992) blames the then educational systems for a miserable job at empowering teachers to appropriately and effectively use technology in the classroom. Manoucherhri (1999) also concurred and suggested that little effort is spent on helping teachers to conceptualize how technologies can be adopted in their real school settings.

In the early 1990’s the training received by pre-service teachers in the use of technology was quite narrow, “most teachers graduate from teacher preparation institutions with limited knowledge of the ways technology can be used in their professional practice” (Office of Technology, 1995, p. 171). The courses which were offered were normally limited to structured demonstration or engagement in theoretical discussions about the value of technology enhanced instruction (Manoucherhri, 1999). During their college years, pre service teachers do not get enough time to learn about technology integration to be able to use them in their own classrooms (Vagle, 1995). Often times training was provided for specific computer applications, such as word processing (Persky, 1990; Shelton and Jones, 1996). Focusing on this skill development is theoretical and, is problematic since it offers teachers little opportunity to transfer their learning into their classrooms (Shelton and Jones, 1996).

With the development in technology, teacher training institutions must also take on the added responsibilities of teaching pre-service students how to use technology as a tool for creating innovative strategies. This is possible “when pre-service teachers learn technology integration strategies by working with and observing practicing teachers and students while they use technology” (Abbott and Faris 2000).

Pre service teachers do not use technology in their classrooms because they are inadequately trained and they are not provided with adequate educational experiences in using technology as a teaching tool.. Manoucherhri (1999) claimed that teacher training programmes do not provide pre service teachers with the requisite experiences in using technology in the classroom. With sufficient training, teachers will become convinced of the usefulness of technology in their instruction, and of the potential of technology for enhancing the curriculum they teach (Manoucherhri, 1999).  College faculty needs to utilize digital technological tools in their classes. In this way pre service teachers will be able to experience technology integration. Enabling teachers to use technology meaningfully requires more than affording them isolated technological skills (Zhao and Frank, 2003). Rather they need to be trained to skillfully integrate technology into their instruction (Thurston, Secaras, and Levin 1997).

Training opportunities should help pre service teachers to better develop their understanding of the value of technology to themselves personally and professionally, while learning of the effective uses on technology in the classroom.

With the help of funding from government and private sectors, teacher training institutions are now better equipped to train teachers to incorporated technology not only in methodology courses, but in content courses as well. This according to White (1994) will provide pre service teachers with more evidence of technology integration.

Training

Training teachers to use technology in the classroom is of paramount importance.  Joyce (1988) proposed that teacher training should not only include a theoretical study of teaching skills, but also demonstrations of the teaching skills and the simulated practice of those skills. The training of teachers then should take the form of coaching. Coaching as defined by Joyce and Showers (1996, 2002) is the collaborative work by teachers and students to solve the problems that may arise during the implementation of an innovation. Whenever coaching is used with theory, demonstration, practice, and feedback, more than 90% of teachers will transfer the new skill into their practice. In asserting the importance of training for teachers in integrating technology, DiBenedetto (2005) suggested that the instructional practices of teachers are influenced by personal factors. Training for the use of technology in teaching and learning should not only focus on the theory and research. Time needs to be given for trainees (pre service teachers) to “conceptualize practice in concrete terms and gain experience through simulated practice” (Joyce, 1992). Therefore, training pre service teachers to use technology in teaching and learning should be; immediate with sustained practice, peer supported, and on-going if we are to gain the many benefits technology offers our children in learning and their futures (Joyce, 1992, White, 1994; Levin and Buell`, 1999; Smith, 1999).

Joyce (1988) claimed the demonstrations of teaching skills, simulated practice of those skills, and constant feedback are essential ingredients in teacher training. Less than 10% of teachers are likely to implement new ideas learned in the traditional training session, in their classrooms (Joyce, 2002). A considerable amount of time must be given to teachers if they are going to get their hands on, and, in turn, transfer to the classroom the knowledge and skills necessary to effectively and completely infuse technology into their curricular areas (Boe, 1989; Hawkins and MacMillan, 1993; Kinnaman, 1990). With the new paradigm of technology integrated instruction, schools are requesting that the beginning teacher be able to transfer technology skills learnt in colleges into the classroom.  This, however, has been identified as the weakest link of most educational programs (Browne and Ritchie, 1991).

While pre service teachers display the characteristics of digital natives by virtue of the era in which they were born, their ability to effectively model the use of technology in teaching and learning is limited. The digital natives are adept in using digital technology for entertainment, education, and communication. They are able to operate them effectively and efficiently.  However, they lack the necessary skills to use these technologies as tools for learning. The integration of technology in the classroom is “not happening” (Plair, 2008).

These multitasked individuals take on numerous roles in their world. These include; “producers, collaborators, researchers, and publishers” (Stead, 2006, p.6). The teacher training programme needs to cater to the learning styles of the pre service teachers. They need to be taught by faculty who value the use of technology in teaching and learning, and who have used the technology personally. In this way the digital natives (pre service teachers) will be better able to use technology in their classrooms.

Innovative use of technology is another characteristic of the digital natives. They are not only users of the technology. They actively create knowledge. The pre service teachers are technologically savvy and have confidence in the positive value of the digital technologies.

Even with the minimal use training provided in using technology as a teaching tool, pre service teachers are still expected to use technology in their own classrooms. Prensky (2001a) is of the view that there will be panacea to the use of technology in teaching and learning once the pre-service teachers enter the teaching profession. However, there are others who believe that disappointed with the digital natives (pre service teachers). “They use the technology for their own purpose,” “they take nothing new to the classroom” are how two head of departments describe their first year teachers’ use of technology in the classroom ( Personal communication with 2 teachers, December 6, 2009).

These digital natives are displaying characteristics of the digital immigrants. They are acting on the assumption that “learners are the same as they have always been, and that the same methods that worked for the teachers when they were students will work for their students now” (Prensky, 2001, p. 3).

The teaching faculty

In order to include technology in pre service teacher education, the needs of the faculty should be addressed. Faculty, these are teacher educators. Most of who were not born in the digital world. They did not grow up with the digital technology and were not taught using digital technology.

Uncertainty about how best to use technology in their classrooms may result in minimal use of technology by college faculty.  The notion of the teacher being the reservoir of knowledge still permeates the walls of higher institutions.  Faculty is therefore reluctant to leave their comfort zone for unfamiliar territories. In the earlier years, teachers were not very receptive to the use of technology.

It has been put forward by researchers that teachers have been the most important piece that makes learning occur. It has always been the duty of teachers to teach content. With the influx of digital technology in the classrooms, the teaching faculty is forced to reconsider their teaching approaches. To this end they have become digital immigrant (Prensky, 2001).  These immigrants often struggle to teach a class of digital natives. This is due to the difference in the spoken language. The digital native speaks a new language while the digital immigrants speak an outdated language. This situation creates uncertainty with the use of technology as a learning tool.

According to Stetson and Bagwell (1999), college faculty is often uncertain on how best to use technology in their classrooms. College faculty has to experience the benefits of using digital technology before they can effectively use it with their students.   Gillangham and Topper (1999) attributed the lack of time to learn about new technology to the minimal use of technology by college faculty.

For pre service teachers to effectively use technology in their teaching episodes, college faculty need to use technology in their courses as learning and teaching tools (Cradler, Freeman, Cradler, McNabb, 2002). There has to be some leadership in the modeling of new pedagogical tools for learning. Faculty must provide leadership in “determining how the new technologies can best be used in the context of the culture, needs, and economic conditions within their country” (UNESCO,  ).

Examples

Below are a few examples of how digital technologies can be use as a learning tool. Educational institution can use simple and inexpensive methods to demonstrate the integration of digital technologies in teaching and learning. Some of these are (a) audio, (b) video, (c) social networks, and (d) online professional development programmes. Audio can be used to capture essential details from notes or lectures. This will give the learners the opportunity to play back the audio at a time most convenient. The digital natives are familiar with iPod and Mp3 players which can be used to store audio. The video is used to capture the thick rich description of the classroom activities. This can be analyzed by the learner at a later date.

Social networks can be used to build learning communities. In this forum, the teacher educators can work together in an asynchronous or synchronous discussion forum. These forums will give the teacher educators the opportunities to create new knowledge while sharing with others.

References

Boe, T. (1989). The next step for educators and the technology industry: Investing in teachers. Educational Technology, 29(3), 39-44.

Browne, D. L., & Ritchie, D. C. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship. A method of staff development for implementing technology in schools. Contemporary  Education, 63, 28-34.

DiBenedetto, A. (2005). Does technology influence teaching practices in the classroom? Paper presented at the National Educational Computing Conference, Philadelphia

Gibson, S. (2002). Incorporating computer-based learning into pre-service education course. Contemporary Issues in technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 2(1), 95-116.

Gillingham, M. G., & Topper, A. (1999). Technology in teacher preparation: Preparing teachers for the future. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(4), 303-321.

Goodwin-Jones, R. (2003). Emerging Technologies: blogs and wikis: environments for On-line Collaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7(1), 12-16.

Grennon Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Hawkins, J., & MacMillan, K. (1993). So what are teachers doing with this stuff? Electronic Learning, 13(2), 26.

Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1996). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 12-15.

Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development. ASCD

Kinnaman, D. E. (1990). Staff development: How to build your winning team. Technology & Learning, 11(2), 24-26.

Laffey, J., & Musser, D. (1998). Attitudes of preservice teachers about using technology

in teaching. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 6, 223-241.

Levin, S. R., & Buell, J. G. (1999). Merging technology into teacher education: Technology tools and faculty collaboration. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 16(1), 7-14.

Manoucherhri, A. (1999). Computers and school mathematics reform: Implications for mathematics teacher education. Computers of Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(1), 31-48.

Marra, R.M., Howland, J., Wedman, J. & Diggs, L. (2003) A little TLC (technology learning cycle) as a means to technology integration. TechTrends, 47(2), 15-19.

Moursand, D. (1992). Empowering teachers. The computing Teacher, 22(1), 70-71.

Office of technology Assessment (1995). Teachers and technology making the connection. Washington, DC: United States Congress, Office of Technology Assessment.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bas

Plair, S. (2008). Revamping professional development for technology integration and fluency. The clearing house, 82(2), 70-74.

Prensky, M. (2001a, September/October). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

Shelton, M., & Jones, M. (1996). Staff development that works! A tale of four t’s. NASSP

Bulletin, 30(4), 34-38

Smith, L. L. (1999). The future of technology in teaching. USA Today, 127(2646), 26-27.

Stetson, R., & Bagwell, T. (1999). Technology and teacher preparation: An oxymoron?

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(2), 145-152

Tapscott, D. (2004). The net generation and the school. Retrieved from

http://www.mff.org/edtech/article.taf?_function=detail&Content_uid1=109 on

June 3, 2009.

Vagle, R. (1995). Technology in teaching methods courses: Is it happening? Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 238-243.

White, C. S. (1994). Technology in a restructured pre-service education: School/university linkages. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 2(2), 119-128.

Thurston, C. O., E.D.Secaras, & J.A. Levin. (1997). Teaching teleapprenticeships: An innovative model for integrating technology into teacher education. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 29, 385-391.

Zhao, Y. & Frank, K. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological

perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 841-878.