Feenburg’s definition of technology is what resonated the most with me. I think calling technology “the medium of daily life in modern societies” is the most appropriate definition of technology since technology really is the medium of our daily lives. From the moment, we wake up in the morning with an alarm clock or phone ringing by our bedside to the time we go to bed at night reading a book on our iPad or replying to emails on our computer, technology has become the medium of our daily lives. For an educator, technology is the “future” that has become the “present” for us. Both of my parents being educators, I always overheard things such as, “I wish we could keep a record of each step a student takes to get to the solution without having to do one-on-one interviews with them”. And then they would say to each other, “maybe in the “future” when there is better technology”. Now is the “future” they all had been waiting for. A student can be a part of an online workplace where they will have to justify each step they take in order to get to the solution that the teacher will have access to. Technology has done groundbreaking work when it comes to teachers being able to read a child’s mind and see where the learning gaps are. Therefore, technology is not only “the medium of daily life” but it is the irreplaceable medium of daily life in modern societies.
Designers of learning experiences should first of all be aware of what do students struggle with the most in a classroom. Students that struggle with staying focused on a task in a classroom will have a different design of TELE whereas; if a class is full of well-behaved students and requires help with students being able to get a deeper understanding of concepts, that will require a different design of TELE. My design of TELE would include testing students’ ability to use the given technology and only if all students are comfortable, then adding that to my design of TELE. I would also make sure that my design of TELE is not being forced on each student. Every student learns in a different way and perhaps the technology-enhanced learning experience may not be the best way to learn a concept for every student. My design for TELE will include an option where students are given the choice to either use TELE or learn the way they feel that is most useful for them.
Your first paragraph was very insightful and helped bring the human equation to technology. To your second paragraph, I was somewhat perplexed by the dichotomy of “students that struggle with staying focused on a task” and “well-behaved students”. It reminds me of one of my friends who was categorized as a struggling and disruptive child all through grade school. Turns out she was completely bored in class; she actually has a genius level IQ and now has a Doctorate degree. Is the problem that we don’t give the right tasks? Why is deep thinking only for the compliant, well-behaved, students? Would it be better to have a class of engaged, excited, and inquisitive students?
I wonder if when we are considering designing a TELE that a universal approach would be most warranted. To be honest the myth of the perfect student is just that, a myth. Well behaved does not mean being able to repeat back answers while sitting silently at a wooden structure. In fact no where in any program of studies does sound or posture have a place. I agree we have to be careful when we use terms like “well behaved” to determine learning ability.
Hi Trisha,
I think there is a bit of misunderstanding going on here. I definitely did not mean to use the term “well behaved” to determine a student’s learning ability. When I used the term “well behaved” I wanted to distinguish students who like to learn by sitting in their seats and would rather not prefer going to a park to experiment different things. Perhaps, I should have used a different term.
GK
Hi Gordon,
I think I should have been more careful when picking what terms to use and perhaps not use the term “well-behaved students”.
I think there is a bit of misunderstanding going on here. I definitely did not mean to use the term “well behaved” to determine a student’s learning ability. When I used the term “well behaved” I wanted to distinguish students who like to learn by sitting in their seats and would rather not prefer going to a park to experiment different things. Perhaps, I should have used a different term.
GK
Hi Gordon,
I think I should have been more careful when picking what terms to use and perhaps not use the term “well-behaved students”.
I think there is a bit of misunderstanding going on here. I definitely did not mean to use the term “well behaved” to determine a student’s learning ability. When I used the term “well behaved” I wanted to distinguish students who like to learn by sitting in their seats and would rather not prefer going to a park to experiment different things. Perhaps, I should have used a different term.
GK
I was intrigued by your statement “Therefore, technology is not only “the medium of daily life” but it is the irreplaceable medium of daily life in modern societies.”. Do you think that we still have the perspective of technology being optional in education? It seems to me that we ask students to check technology used in the real world at the door and if we do let them use technology in the classroom it is the contrived project that has no place outside of the classroom walls. Have you seen the real world application of technology in a classroom? What are examples of this?